Fenland

[Bert Vanderveen]

A font created 100% from the command line

Knuth did that, right? Not a great success…

[Bert Vanderveen]

Fenland is somewhat reminiscent of the studies students would make in my days in art school — go for a principle and stick to it until it hurts.

It is fresh in one way, but dated in another. A novelty font, in other words.

(A Dutch fashion writer made a similar remark about the last collection of the fashion house Martin Margiella: the last ones shown in the show were like art school exercises.)

Sorry, Jeremy, I am harsher on hungover Tuesday nights…

[Ryan Maelhorn]

"Lowercase v w x y seem to me awkward and..."

I actually quite like the y and the v. There are some brilliant moments here, for sure.
I think what put me off is that at book-size point sizes, it really looks just like a plain old regular sans. You would have to look closely to notice anything was new or different about it. Of course that probably wouldnt be said of the people who post here, as they are so intune with fonts and letters. But I would think almost anyone else wouldn't even notice there was something new or unusual about this font at 10 point, and there is nothing that waves a flag and says, "come on, look closer."

"But why is it awesome that he (quite skilfully) created letters that cannot be drawn with the pen?"

Well now this is the future of fonts of course. We have had hundreds of years of calligraphic inspired letters. Is there really that much left to explore in the genre? Seems to me that in order to make true progress we must leave the pen behind.

"The hands-on practicality of a looping process that involves so much drawing would see to it that any “system” that emerged would have its inconsistencies."

Yes. This makes me really want to start exploring Python with Fontlab. It would be very interesting to design a system purely in code and have it tackle the letter shapes. A font created 100% from the command line. Very interesting, indeed.

[Ryan Maelhorn]

"And that’s no small achievement! The purpose of a typeface is to make us read, not to 'look closely to notice anything new or different'"

That is a an incredibly valid point of view, one which I admire greatly. I am still in the process of trying to reconcile it with my own muse. I know in my mind that you are right, but I know in my heart that I love beautiful forms that draw just a bit of attention to themselves. I guess that is the curse of being a type designer, not that I really am one, yet.

[Ryan Maelhorn]

\:D

[Nick Shinn]

… go for a principle and stick to it until it hurts.

The same could be said of several types that were novel in their day and have since become classics. Futura for one, Palatino for another.

It is fresh in one way, but dated in another. A novelty font, in other words.

That’s a sad reflection on the present state of design, when innovation is seen as old-fashioned.
What then is contemporary—styling, retreads and hacks? Mid-century modern?

[Ryan Maelhorn]

""""""
… go for a principle and stick to it until it hurts.

The same could be said of many types that were novel in their day and have since become classics.
"That’s a sad reflection on the present state of design, ..."
"""""

I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's saying that it's completely new and original in spots and yet completely old and dated in others. Which I agree with.

[John Hudson]

Ryan: We have had hundreds of years of calligraphic inspired letters. Is there really that much left to explore in the genre? Seems to me that in order to make true progress we must leave the pen behind.

Or, alternatively, pick up the pen again (or some other tool). Noordzij makes this point in Types Best Remembers / Types Best Forgotten: the freezing of letters in their typographic norms that took place in the second half of the 15th Century is an anomaly in the history of writing, in which the invention and proliferation of new styles is the norm.

I'm interested in both approaches: how to design convincing types freed from tool derived models and the invention of new tool derived models. Oh yes, and after all these years I am also still interested in the old tool derived models.

[William Berkson]

Tankard also did Disturbance, another deliberately rule-busting font. I don't think it's been used much. Stanley Morison said that type design is an inherently conservative art, because of the need to keep the letters and words recognizable. I don't know if it is a necessity, but it does seem to be incredibly hard to be both extremely different from past designs and extremely good.

[Joe Pemberton]

Tweeted and "hand picked."

[John Hudson]

Bill, I recall Disturbance being used a lot in the 90s, particularly in the UK.

Another of Jeremy's display types that I have always admired very much for its creative approach to letter forms and relationships, Blue Island, I've only ever seen in use once, but I don't think Adobe did a good job promoting it.

[William Berkson]

John, Ok, I stand corrected; I don't recall seeing it here in the US. In my visits to London I loved seeing Bliss used in particular for the pitch for the Olympics.

[dezcom]

Stanley Morison also passed a while back. Why is there only "one true way" that we must adhere to. The "add another spoonful of progress" approach is fine and all and should be appreciated but we need not genuflect in the shadow of history.

[William Berkson]

Who said there is only one true way?

[dezcom]

"Stanley Morison said that type design is an inherently conservative art"

[William Berkson]

Not the same thing. And I said that I don't know if Morison's right, but that it does seem very hard to make extreme innovations well in type. And that makes me wonder. I'm all for innovation in type when it works, like the sans Frutiger. I'm not against innovation or experimentation. I'm just saying that the more wild experiments don't seem to work very often, and Fenland is one that for me doesn't work.

The Victorian era seems to have been one where a lot of innovation in type happened, such as the creation of sans and slabs, and some of it has survived pretty well. I wonder why.

[Nick Shinn]

I'm just saying that the more wild experiments don't seem to work very often, and Fenland is one that for me doesn't work.

I wouldn’t say Fenland is a wild experiment, it seems well considered and carefully developed.
Slabs and sans were invented before the Victorian era.

[William Berkson]

What I meant by wild is that it is a lot more of a departure than most other new faces, and that I think is true of Fenland, and what Hrant was responding to.

Chris, you're right that we can learn a lot from experiments that don't fully succeed. And it's great that Jeremy Tankard has the energy to do both more conventional typefaces and more experimental ones. I just don't think that this one works very well. And it seems to me that difficulty of making more radical experiments work is greater in type than in say painting or even architecture.

[sim]

[Track]

[dezcom]

Fenland does not seem that wild to me.
What you might call extreme innovations do not have to work perfectly in and of themselves. It is like test firing an artillery round. You first have to fire one long to see the target.
The danger to me is that if we signal so strongly that the only way to proceed is by bringing one grain of sand at a time that we will stifle those who would be willing to fire one long. Don't worry, the sand grain pilers will still be able to proceed as always. They may even be able to see that signal flare fired ahead of them in time to speed up their own work ;-)

[dezcom]

A torch may not work very well at illuminating a dark cave, but it can work well enough to see where to put the finished light fixtures, when they are ready.

[Nick Shinn]

Bill, it’s a little early to say whether Fenland “works” or not, based on the opinion of someone with a preference for old book faces!

Shouldn’t one give typographers the opportunity to take it for a spin for condemning it as an also-ran?

[William Berkson]

So, it is improper for me to express any opinions about a typeface because of my magical powers to limit other designers' options? Ridiculous.

And who are you to say what my preferences are? I like a lot of typefaces, including not only old book faces, but also new book faces, script faces, sans serifs, novelty faces, etc., etc.

[Nick Shinn]

You went beyond saying it doesn’t work for you, to saying it won’t work for others:

I just don't see how this is going to be used successfully.

I don’t think that’s improper, just that hits and misses are hard to predict on the basis of personal likes and dislikes.

I have certainly gotten the impression from your posts on Typophile that you think old book faces are best and most readable, and of course the typeface that you have published was designed by Caslon. Doesn’t that demonstrate a preference?

[Ryan Maelhorn]

Actually now that I have looked at it for more than just a while, this font is really growing on me. Maybe that's what Hrant, who has been strangely absent from this thread especially considering that he started it, meant by "fascinating." Without a doubt my favourite pieces of art are those that I don't like at all at first, but which eventually make me love them.