[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Definition of the Artists Book (YES, again)



>For me typography is inherently visual. The whole point is to make the
>words visable/readable,attractive/whatever. How many printed versions of
>Poe's "The Raven" exist? The essential difference between them is visual:
>The typeface chosen, the size of type, the paper, the illustrations (if
>any), etc. I'm sorry Charles, but while a Typographer can make an artists
>book, it's primary interest is still visual.

It's perhaps primary, but typography without a distinctive relationship of
that typography to the content/meaning of the text at hand, is merely a
typographer's hubris, or just bad work, perhaps.

cheers, richard


charles


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]