HARTMUT STCKL

Typography: body and dress of a text a signing mode between language and image
HARTMUT STCKL is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Applied Linguistics at the Institute of Media Communication and Intercultural Communication, Chemnitz University, Germany. His main research areas are in multimodal media communication, text linguistics and stylistics. His most recent publication, Language in the Image The Image in Language (de Gruyter, 2004) analyses the numerous interrelations between language and image in printed mass media texts (journalism and advertising) and especially emphasizes the pictorial nature of language. Address: Institut fr Medienkommunikation und Interkulturelle Kommunikation Angewandte Sprachwissenschaft, Philosophische Fakultt, Technische Universitt Chemnitz, Thringer Weg 11, 09107 Chemnitz, Germany. [email: hartmut.stoeckl@phil.tu-chemnitz.de]

ABSTRACT This study demonstrates how semiotic theories can be used to understand typography. Starting from the assumption that typography represents a mode/code in its own right, which interacts with all other textual signing modes, the article outlines a typographic grammar as a structured set of networked resources. The analytical toolkit is then illustrated with the help of two sample texts. Based on some general semiotic reflections about the nature and operations of the graphic sign, this article also attempts a concise account of typographic meaning making and its communicative effects. KEY WORDS communicative effects domains of typographic work meaning making pictoriality semiotic layer

graphic sign

language vs image

TYPOGRAPHY AND LINGUISTIC/SEMIOTIC THEORY With respect to the history (Lechner, 1981; Raible, 1991) and practice (Willberg, 2002; Willberg and Forssman, 1999) of typography, body and dress are complementary and apt metaphors for how graphic designers and typographers might look at their work. When applied to possible stances of linguistics towards typography, however, these metaphors serve to highlight two contrasting approaches. Those that view typography as the body assume that it is the material precondition of any text. Just as there is no speech without voice qualities and intonation, there is no written document without (typo)-graphic qualities. In this sense, both typography and prosody are indispensable paraverbal qualities, which would seem inherently tied to various linguistic and pragmatic levels of an utterance. When we look at typography as the dress of a text, it merely forms its outer shell, its designable surface, which can be thought of as further removed from the linguistics of a text. It would at best be the sociolinguist, then, who might share an interest in typography as it reveals something about the nature of the text producer or says something about the kind of social or aesthetic address (audience design, Bell, 2001) intended. Not surprisingly, then, traditional linguists have tended not show much interest in typography or graphic design. In their view, writing is secondary to speech, merely an instrument for encoding spoken language. Consequently, linguists have concentrated on the phoneme-grapheme correlations in different languages and on the nature of various writing systems (Drscheid, 2002), but have ignored the individual variability of sign tokens. Saussurean-style linguists have also erroneously focused on the sentence or smaller linear units of language and thus failed to understand the spatial nature of text on the page and its organizing effects (Waller, 1991). So it is only the more recent, semiotics-inspired trends in text linguistics and stylistics (Fix, 2001; Kress and Van Leeuwen, 2001; Stckl, 2004), which have acknowledged the crucial function of typography and text design. Following the dictum that meaning can be made with the help of various sign systems and that language is mostly tied to non-verbal modes in communicative practice, typography can be understood as a mode/code in its own right. It contributes to textual meaning in numerous ways and must be seen as a challenge to linguistic and semiotic theories as its workings within the text are both

visual communication 4(2)

76

77

visual communication 4(2)

inherently tied to language as well as relatively independent from it. What insight then does a semiotic take of typography reveal? First of all, writing can be called a connotative sign system (in the sense of Barthes, 1996) as it uses content-form combinations of a primary sign system (language) as signifiers in a secondary system (typography). Although this explains the relatively close connection between graphic design and aspects of language, things are slightly more complicated. Berger (1979: 12) has shown that typographic elements are complex signs which comprise various semiotic layers, each capable of independently conveying meaning. First, typography, of course, serves to encode language. Whether writing substitutes for speech as traditional linguists would have it or whether graphic signs form an autonomous sign system that takes elements of reality or mental concepts as its signieds as semioticians (Nth, 1985: 264) and practitioners (Sttzner, 2003: 285) claim this does not alter the fact that readers need to decode graphic signs in order to make linguistic meaning (graphemes into phonemes or lexemes, etc.). Second, beyond this elementary and highly automated level, literate users of typography will also notice various aspects of graphic and visual detail which convey often subtle, never completely redundant and invariably connotative, meanings. Here, type faces may point to the nature of the document, carry emotional values or indicate the writers intended audience, and aspects of the layout may serve to reinforce the thematic structure of a given text and facilitate access to its information. Finally, on yet another level of typographic meaning making, the graphic signs of writing can assume pictorial qualities. Thus, letters may form visual shapes which stand for objects from reality, signal states-of-affairs or actions, and illustrate emotions. Materials and techniques of graphic sign making, too, may be made salient in text design and can thus convey something about situation, genre and stylistic intent of a communicative occurrence this is also a pictorial kind of communication. It is this threefold semiotic nature of typography that provides its communicative flexibility. As Gross (1994: 76) puts it, producers and recipients alike can shift between different modes of signication (Signikationsmodi ), whose readings intermingle and interrelate. Interestingly, the three semiotic layers of typography correspond to the three general types of signs (according to Peircean semiotics): reading is mainly symbolic, an act of deciphering conventional signs, but it can take on indexical and iconic qualities. In many ways, registering the connotative and pictorial aspects of typographic design can be seen to be prior to the symbolic decoding in the process of reading as graphic shapes intrude upon our perception as gestalt properties of images. GRAPHIC SIGNS BETWEEN LANGUAGE AND IMAGE The German word Schriftbild (writing + picture) neatly epitomizes readers ability to abstract from the linguistic function of writing and focus on its pictorial qualities. When they do this, they partly and temporarily ignore the symbolic nature of typography and perceive a written document as a designed surface, a layout of graphic elements in the space of a page. Of course, texts differ as to the pictorial qualities of their typography and graphic design. Although no text genre completely dispenses with the connotative properties of typography, some (e.g. advertising, Berger, 2001) are clearly more closely allied to the use of pictorial effects than others (e.g. legal documents). In typographic practice this division between normative, merely symbolic typography and more normbreaking, innovative, indexical and iconic typography is usually expressed in the terms

Figure 2: Art from Fear of diy-ing (The Guardian, Weekend, 17 July 2004).

Figure 3: Da Luca (The Guardian, Weekend, 19 June 2004).

Figure 1: EMI (The Guardian Unlimited The Guide , 26 June2 July 2004).

Gebrauchstypographie or Lesetypographie (typography for reading) versus Akzidenztypographie or Displaytypographie (typography for special occasions). While text types which adhere to the former aim to keep to established typographic standards so as to be easily recognizable and highly functional, text types abiding by the latter practise a playful approach to typographic patterns, which seeks to use the pictorial potential of typography to the full (Gaede, 2002: 501ff.). As image and pictoriality are many-faceted and somewhat vague terms in semiotics and linguistics (Stckl, 2004), it may be useful to briefly sketch out to what extent and in what ways typography can be attributed pictorial qualities. Generally, there is no difference in the graphic signs afliation with language or image. Sttzner (2003: 285) rightly points out that it is mainly its higher degree of complexity and its gurative nature which mark the pictorial graphic sign off from the verbal graphic sign, although a neat dividing line cannot be drawn. With recourse to Goodmans (1976) theory of semiotic density, it is correct to say that the more relevant the graphic aspects of a signs gestalt are to its meaning, the more it is likely to be pictorial in nature. Consequently, typography already starts assuming pictorial dimensions once recipients notice certain graphic qualities (font type, size, weight, contrast, tension, ending, colour, direction, position, etc.) over and above the type of the letter and bring it to bear on the meaning of the text. Another aspect of pictoriality comes into play when we think of the non-linear aspects of typography. Thanks to its spatial arrangement of lines, text blocks and illustrations on the page and thanks to additional

visual communication 4(2)

78

79

visual communication 4(2)

typographic elements (tables, headings, enumerations, indices, glossaries etc. adjunct aids according to Waller, 1991: 367), any layout communicates information about text structure (thematic and illocutionary) and organizes recipients access to various parts of the text. Pictoriality proper, however, is only achieved when typographic elements (letters, lines, etc.) form visual signs which resemble objects, geometrical gures or pictorial symbols. Such forms of typopictoriality (Weidemann, 1994) can be realized by different means: position and direction of lines may create contours of objects or imitate simple shapes, type may be composed so as to form recognizable gures (see Figure 1) or letters may be replaced by images or pictorial signs which resemble the shapes of the letters (gurative letters, Gaede, 2002: 527) (see Figure 2). In addition, typography takes on pictorial traits whenever it employs structural resources typical of the image mode, e.g. colour or perspective. Finally, (typo)-graphic design also has pictorial effects when its material, i.e. the medium and its techniques/instruments, become obvious to the reader in the act of communication. Texts are then neutralized, as it were, e.g. paper is made to look like cloth/canvas and print/ink like wine (see Figure 3). As a result, communicative artefacts lose some of their articiality and gain authenticity. Consequently, we encounter texts as real objects associated with their original contexts rather than as accumulations of mediated signs a semiotic process Kress and Van Leeuwen (2001: 10ff.) call experiential meaning potential. It is worth bearing in mind here that, although somewhat wild in nature as they temporarily suspend the symbolic readings of type (Gross, 1994: 58ff. calls this wild semiosis), iconic and indexical typography are closely allied to the linguistic functions of typography. Meanings constructed from typopictoriality may support, reinforce, reinterpret or contradict verbally construed messages; at any rate, these formal and semantic interrelations are intended and aim to create a holistic entity. A GRAMMAR OF TYPOGRAPHY? As we know from our daily experience with multimodal texts, e.g. opening credits in lms, TV commercials or print ads, typography conveys ample and subtle meanings beyond its language-encoding function. As one of its many modes, its meanings are closely tied to the messages communicated by the grammars of language, image, music and sound. So a typeface may match the subject or genre of a text, a layout will follow the thematic structure of a text, type can be adapted to the design of an image (Neuenschwander, 2001) and lines of type might dance to the rhythm of the music or rise and fall with the tune of a song or the intensity of a noise (Bellantoni and Woolman, 1999). For any set of signs to have a grammar, the signs need to follow elementary rules in terms of semantics, syntax and pragmatics. In addition to standing in for spoken language, the semantics of typography resides in its wealth of connotative meanings derived from graphic detail and in its pictorial qualities as explained earlier. The syntactic level of typography comprises all arrangements and combinations of typographic elements in the space of a page or the frame of a document. Wehde (2000: 119-26) observes that texts usually adhere to specific congurations of typographic elements which serve to identify individual texts as belonging to a special text type or genre. She calls such highly institutionalized and conventional patterns of typographic syntax typographische Dispositive . The pragmatics of typography is embodied in the calculated use of certain typo- and text-graphic elements for certain envisaged effects. Similar to language there is ample choice of forms for the communicator, who needs to know the rules of stylistic aptness and pragmatic decorum.

Unlike language, typography has what we might call a weak grammar. This is due to a number of reasons. First, individual typographic elements are hard to distinguish from one another as they often co-occur and interrelate. Second, typographic meaning is heavily context-variable (Wehde, 2000: 90) and has established various conventions in different cultural domains. Finally, typographic signs are both polysemous and homonymous to a greater extent than language: one typographic element having multiple meanings and one meaning being realized by different typographic means. In an attempt to model the grammar of typography and to provide a toolkit for its textual analysis I suggest a tripartite division of typographic resources. On the highest level the typographic sign system can be broken down into four domains or dimensions of typographic work which represent typographic or textual units of varying size: (i) microtypography refers to fonts and individual letters; (ii) mesotyporaphy concerns the conguration of typographic signs in lines and text blocks; (iii) macrotypography deals with the graphic structure of the overall document; and (iv) paratypography is devoted to typographic media, i.e. surface materials and instruments for producing typographic signs. Each domain of typographic work now comprises a set of properties or elements which form the building blocks of the typographic mode and the next lower level in the system. Those properties can in turn be adjusted to form concrete typographic gestalts on the lowest system level. Table 1 shows the logics of the typographic grammar and provides its inventory. For reasons of space, completeness cannot be my objective here. The terminology used only gives a tentative orientation anyone familiar with typography will know that there are numerous attempts to rename and regroup elements in the typographic system (Gerstner, 1972; Jegensdorf, 1980; Kapr and Schiller, 1980; Lechner, 1981; Ruder, 1982). What needs to be borne in mind is that the graphic resources in the four domains overlap and are heavily interdependent. The grammar is not supposed to truly reflect practice, but has been conceived for text-analytical purposes. Most important, though, the system demonstrates the structural choice available to typographers but cannot model the use made of the structures. Following Kress and Van Leeuwen (2001: 4) typography should be viewed not as a static grammar, but as an open resource, whose users creatively shape and extend its sign repertoire and the signs functions. THE MEANINGS OF TYPOGRAPHY The meaning of typographic resources lies in their wide range of flexible communicative functions, in their pragmatic and aesthetic impact over and above the provision of pure legibility. Since it is a visible language, typography is intricately bound up with the workings of linguistics within the confines of a given semiotic event or product/text. Yet, paradoxically, the processes of generating typographic meanings largely go unnoticed both in linguistics and in the predominantly prescriptive or technical study of typography. Linguists simply deny the importance of graphic elements. They are averse to seeing writing and layout as connected with language and verbal communication and refuse to acknowledge typography as a semiotic mode. Although typographers and graphic designers, unlike linguists, usually command the terminology to describe the morphology of writing and page design, they too do not unduly reflect on how and why in a given text meaning is conveyed with the help of certain typographic means. To them, design combines the arts of intuition and creation, neither of which are normally subject to analysis or didactics. Using two sample texts I aim to demonstrate how typography can suggest meanings in

visual communication 4(2)

80

81

visual communication 4(2)

Domains of typographic work MICROTYPOGRAPHY relates to the design of fonts and individual graphic signs

Typographic building blocks

Typographic proportions

type face type size type style colour of type

Garamond, Verdana etc. point size graph, style, mode (Sttzner, 2003: 290ff.) black vs inverted or coloured, etc.

MESOTYPOGRAPHY relates to the conguration of graphic signs in lines and text blocks

letter t word spacing line spacing (leading) amount of print on page alignment of type (type composition) position /direction of lines

standard, spaced, reduced, etc. narrow, wide, etc. double spacing, single spacing signs /print per page left-/right-aligned / centred horizontal, vertical, diagonal, circular, etc. hand lettering plus type size of text blocks, distance between blocks ornamented /coloured underlined, italics etc. headline hierarchies, enumerations, tables, charts, indices, footnotes, marginalia, etc.
Figure 4: Pulsar (The Guardian, Weekend, 10 July 2004).

mixing of fonts

MACROTYPOGRAPHY relates to the graphic structure of the overall document

indentations and paragraphing caps and initials typographic emphasis ornamentation devices

assembling text and graphics (image)

image-caption-relations, gurative letters. typopictoriality

PARATYPOGRAPHY relates to materials, instruments and techniques of graphic signs-making

material quality of medium (paper quality) practices of signing (Sttzner, 2003: 298ff.)

thickness, format, surface, etc. graphing, making characters, composing, moulding (Sttzner, 2003: 299)

Table 1: Typographic grammar a toolkit for analysis (exemplary section)

many subtle ways and how these individual strands of meaning can be combined and related to the verbal structure of the text. In order to do this, I follow the logic proposed for the typographic mode in my toolkit structural system (see Table 1). On a micro-level the Da Luca wine advertisement (Figure 3) uses a red, semi-bold, handwritten headline, which has connotations of individuality, builds analogies to the texts content (ruby red colour, blackberries, ripe fruit ) and supports the stance of the verbal text: the winemaker relates his very private version of the commoditys production. Apart from the type size, a number of typographic means on the meso-level help to bring out the overall (graphic) structure of the text. The headline and slogan visibly contrast with the body copy in terms of fonts (mixture: handwritten/print, sans serif/serif), leading, word spacing, right aligned vs centred justication and position/direction of the lines (bent vs straight). The resulting gestalt complies with the typographic standard in advertising, whereby different functional parts of the text are usually clearly marked off from one another. On the next higher level (macrotypography), it becomes apparent that by grouping the headline with the painted portrait image on the left and the body copy/slogan with the bottle on the right, symmetry and balance are created as the format is divided into two halves of roughly equal weight. This also has the effect of leaving some open space in the centre, which allows the reader to focus on the graphic materiality of the text, which is the subject of analysis on the paralevel. Here, the canvas-like qualities of the surface in conjunction with the paint-like quality of the handwriting (note the splashes and splatters accompanying the headline) connote art and artistry, which are to rub off on the advertised product and its making. For good measure, a quick look at another example. The Pulsar watch advertisement (Figure 4) also displays a font (micro-level) which is very well suited for expressing connotations of individuality, stressing that we are not dealing with just any watch. In addition, because it possesses an abundance of rounded and highly embellished graphic shapes, English script is also capable of indicating the feminine

visual communication 4(2)

82

83

visual communication 4(2)

quality of the product; moreover, thanks to its historical afliation, it may well also convey associations of timeless beauty and classic value. On the meso-level the typographic design features two semantically relevant aspects. First, varying measures of leading and word spacing in combination with differing type-sizes underline the motley collection of personal details expressed in the words of the ad. Second, the two parts of the information structure in the ad (ideal and real, according to Kress and Van Leeuwen, 1996) are marked off by very different fonts (English script, modern Antiqua). Unlike the Da Luca wine advertisement (Figure 3), where images and language are kept neatly apart, the watch advert integrates writing into the pictorial part of the text because here the writing space is provided by an image element (dress). Thanks to this macro-level technique, the writing gains in pictoriality and the picture assumes a clear logic to the effect that everything stated relates to the woman depicted. Finally, on the para-level the simultaneity of dress and page space can be perceived as a silhouette technique, whose black and white character enhances the aesthetic dimensions of the ad and ideally brings out the English script. COMMUNICATIVE EFFECTS OF TYPOGRAPHY Just as writers pick and choose from a stock of available words and phrases for stylistic effect, typographers and graphic designers have choices to make concerning graphic shapes and their positioning on the page and are guided by considerations of optimum suitability and expressivity. As we have seen from just two samples, the ways in which typography works are varied. Invariably, though, it operates in close connection with the linguistic message and structure of the text. Mostly, the aim is some kind of paralleled harmony between verbal and graphic structures and meanings, although calculated contrasts and other more subtle semantic relations are also possible. Applying basic communication or text theory, we can easily discern central modes of typographic operations. If typography is indeed a code, it should be capable of fullling the three Hallidayan meta-functions (Halliday, 1994). Our examples illustrate this aptly. First, typography works on the ideational level as it refers to, comments on or reinforces verbal messages of the text pictorial typography can express ideas on its own by virtue of representing objects. Second, typography functions inter-personally: it says something about the nature or emotional state of the writer, anticipates the aesthetic inclinations of the addressees or indicates the nature of the communicative contact between writer and reader. Third, graphic design is textual when it serves to visually structure a verbal message and bring out its logical make-up. Compared with Jakobsons (1971) language functions we can see that the Hallidayan meta-functions explain typography in terms of sender, recipient, subject and message of a communicative event. Two more ways in which typography may work must be added by recourse to Jakobsons medium and code. First, the medium of a semiotic product can become relevant when its materiality (the instruments, materials and actions applied in its production) is emphasized, as illustrated in both examples analysed (Figures 3 and 4). Second, the coded nature of typography comes to the fore whenever production and interpretation of typographic design hinge upon cultural, fashion or trend-related and domain-specic connotations of graphic means. Clearly, typography can have numerous functions and it would be a rewarding venture to study the systematic relations between the use of (typo)-graphic means and their communicative functions with respect to text and linguistic structures. However detailed and intricate the workings and effects of typography may be, they fall into the following four broad modes of operation, which highlight the

cognitive underpinnings and semiotic dynamics of graphic meaning making: (1) typography structures visual space and thus creates optical balance, shapes textual order and guides readers attention by providing a page-map to navigate; (2) (typo)-graphic design has a strong pictorial potential as it can form visual signs acting like icons signifying objects, states-of-affairs or actions related in one way or another to the message of the verbal text. A reference to the graphic material and technological making of a text as we have seen can be equally pictorial; (3) perhaps most important to linguists, typographic means refer to the pragmatics of linguistic structures in that they superimpose on, accompany, reinforce and accentuate syntactic, semantic, prosodic and speech-act structures of the verbal text; and (4) typography reproduces and reshapes cultural and media conventions, which designers and readers have negotiated in typographic practice over time. Any new graphic design will be created and interpreted against the background of what users of typography know about the code and its meanings, at the same time extending and enhancing typographic resources. CONCLUSION Twenty years ago semiotic and linguistic reflection on the nature of typography would have merely been a theoretical game and a nuisance to the professional practitioner, because at that time typography was rmly in the hands of a trained elite who composed handwritten and typewriter manuscripts for print. Now, in an age when most societies are increasingly computerizing all kinds of writing, we have all become our own typographers as we handle our documents from start to finish, i.e. from microtypography to paratypography. In doing so we develop our own tastes, designs and rules, thus shaping a new domain of un- or semiprofessional lay-typography, but more often than not we simply lack sound knowledge and much-needed skills. Systematic thinking about the semiotic nature of typography can help to underpin and guide the didactic reworking and popularization of a body of knowledge which up to now has been used by professionals mainly as a prescriptive checklist and not as a tool for the enablement of the typographically semi-literate.

visual communication 4(2)

84

85

visual communication 4(2)

RYAN PESCATORE FRISK + CATELIJNE VAN MIDDELKOOP

REFERENCES
Barthes, R. (1996) Connotation, in P. Cobley (ed.) The Communication Theory Reader , pp. 129-33. London: Routledge. Bell, A. (2001) Back in Style: Reworking Audience Design, in P. Eckert and J.R. Rickford (eds) Style and Sociolinguistic Variation , pp. 139-69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bellantoni, J. and Woolman, M. (1999) Type in Motion: Innovative Digitale Gestaltung. Mainz: Hermann Schmidt. Berger, C. (1979) Semiotik und Design Theorie und Praxis, Ars Semeiotica 2: 1-22. Berger, W. (2001) Advertising Today . London: Phaidon. Drscheid, C. (2002) Einfhrung in die Schriftlinguistik . Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Fix, U. (2001) Zugnge zu Stil als semiotisch komplexer Einheit: Thesen, Erluterungen und Beispiele, in E.M. Jakobs and A. Rothkegel (eds) Perspektiven auf Stil , pp. 11326. Tbingen: Niemeyer. Gaede, W. (2002) Abweichen von der Norm: Enzyklopdie kreativer Werbung . Mnchen: Langen Mller/Herbig. Gerstner, K. (1972) Kompendium fr Alphabeten: Eine Systematik der Schrift . Teufen AR: Niggli. Goodman, N. (1976) Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols . Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill. Gross, S. (1994) Lesezeichen: Kognition, Medium und Materialitt im Leseprozess . Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar . London: Arnold. Jakobson, R. (1971) Fundamentals of Language . The Hague: Mouton. Jegensdorf, L. (1980) Schriftgestaltung und Textanordnung: Theorie und didaktische Praxis der visuellen Kommunikation durch Schrift . Ravensburg: Maier. Kapr, A. and Schiller, W. (1980) Gestalt und Funktion der Typographie . Leipzig: Fachbuchverlag. Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Reading Images. The Grammar of Visual Design . London: Routledge. Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (2001) Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication . London: Arnold. Lechner, H. (1981) Geschichte der modernen Typographie: Von der Steglitzer Werkstatt zum Kathodenstrahl . Mnchen: Thiemig. Neuenschwander, B. (2001) Letterwork: Creative Letterforms in Graphic Design . London: Phaidon. Nth, W. (1985) Handbuch der Semiotik . Stuttgart: Metzler. Raible, W. (1991) Die Semiotik der Textgestalt: Erscheinungsformen und Folgen eines kulturellen Evolutionsprozesses . Heidelberg: Winter. Ruder, E. (1982) Typographie: Ein Gestaltungslehrbuch . Teufen AR: Niggli. Stckl, H. (2004) Die Sprache im Bild Das Bild in der Sprache: Zur Verknpfung von Sprache und Bild im massenmedialen Text: Konzepte, Theorien, Analysemethoden . Berlin: de Gruyter. Stckl, H. (2004) In Between Modes: Language and Image in Printed Media, in E. Ventola (ed.) Perspectives on MultiModality . Amsterdam: Benjamins. Sttzner, A. (2003) Signography as a Subject in its Own Right, Visual Communication 2(3): 285-302. Waller, R. (1991) Typography and Discourse, in R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Rosenthal and P.P. David (eds) Handbook of Reading Research , Vol. 2, pp. 341-80. New York: Longman. Wehde, S. (2000) Typographische Kultur: eine zeichentheoretische und kulturgeschichtliche Studie zur Typographie und ihrer Entwicklung . Tbingen: Niemeyer. Weidemann, K. (1994) Wo der Buchstabe das Wort fhrt: Ansichten ber Schrift und Typographie . Ostfildern: Cantz. Willberg, H.P. (2002) Wegweiser Schrift: Erste Hilfe im Umgang mit Schriften. Was passt was wirkt was strt . Mainz: Schmidt. Willberg, H.P. and Forssman, F. (1999) Erste Hilfe Typographie: Ratgeber fr Gestaltung mit Schrift . Mainz: Schmidt.

RYAN PESCATORE FRISK cofounded Strange Attractors Design together with CATELIJNE VAN MIDDELKOOP while completing his MFA at Cranbrook Academy of Art. Fascinated by subcultural type and related treatments, this typographic anthropologist is currently attending the Post Graduate Type]Media program at The Royal Academy of Art in The Hague, The Netherlands. Address: www.strangeattractors.com [email: ryan@strangeattractors.com]

86

visual communication 4(2)

visual communication 4(2)

87