| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 24, 2005 14:01:46 GMT+01:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
dear daniel van der velden,
my name is kai bernau, i'm a graphic design student from germany, studying in the final (graduation) year of the graphic design course at the kabk in den haag.
for my graduation project, i am thinking about neutrality. i just read your text "White flag" on the JVE website, and i would love to "interview" you on this topic for my graduation project (or rather yet: let you talk, philosophise, reflect on it, drop in anecdotes, your convictions or whatever you would like to give me).
i am also trying to interview other graphic designers on the same topic; their opinions, and hopefully yours, will be a part of my research.
if you would be so kind as to grant me an (unguided) interview, this would be a first starting point:
- is there neutrality in (graphic) design, in typography?
- what is it, and where is it?
- what is neutral?
- is neutrality in design a good thing?
unfortunately, i can at the monent not tell you what exactly i am working on, because i would like to try and stay neutral at this point, and not influence the direction of what you will (hopefully) be writing.
if you would agree to write anything that i can use, i would be utterly grateful, but i would have to ask you to -- yikes! -- do so until maximum end of april... sorry about that.
if you could give me a small (preferably positive) reply whether you'd be interested, i'd be very happy.
regards,
kai
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 24, 2005 18:51:27 GMT+01:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
dear kai bernau,
thank you for your request. in 'white flag' I am linking the issues of neutrality and invisibility and say that they're not as innocent as we first thought or hoped. of course what is on the web is a summary of the real talk.
I would be happy to answer some of your questions but for me in order to make some sense your questions need to be more specific. a question like 'what is neutral' is far too general and can be answered by the dictionary; so I would in fact like that your questions reveal, even if you want to stay 'neutral', more research and study of the subject; then I would be happy to devote some time to answering this.
thanks for your interest; I hope you undestand this
best regards, daniel van der velden
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 29, 2005 18:47:17 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
On Mar 24, 2005, at 18:51, Daniel van der Velden wrote:
I would be happy to answer some of your questions but for me in order to make some sense your questions need to be more specific. a question like 'what is neutral' is far too general and can be answered by the dictionary; so I would in fact like that your questions reveal, even if you want to stay 'neutral', more research and study of the subject; then I would be happy to devote some time to answering this.
Dear Daniel,
thank you for your fast response; and my apologies if I had you thinking I would want you to do my homework -- the fact is, as I stated, that I didn't want to make any limitations or implications on the subject before having heard anything on a broader scale. But I unserstand your hesitation very well, and it was similar with other people's reaction on my mail.
So here goes a little teaser:
For my graduation project at the Royal Academy of fine arts in The Hague, I want to research neutrality in typeface design:
- Can there be a neutral typeface?
- What does it look like?
- And what is it good for?
- What does this neutraliy imply?
- What are the limits of neutrality?
- Are my methods valid and useful?
You can find more information, as well as my work in progress, here:
http://kaibernau.com/neutrality.php
Any comment would be highly appreciated, and thank you again for your time
Kai
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 30, 2005 09:15:51 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
dear kai,
thanks for this. maybe the paradox is the attempt to approach neutrality neutrally. especially since anyone studying graphic design history knows that the values of neutrality are inherited, not given, it seems a subject impossible to tackle without some form of premeditation. I am starting here by sending you the full text, plus the powerpoint, of 'white flag'. it's a text I developed for the viper conference in basel in november 2004.
A summary of the «White Flag» lecture can be found on Daniel van der Velden's CV page
looking forward to your response, (perhaps you have questions or ideas based on this text)
best, daniel van der velden
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 30, 2005 14:31:13 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
dear daniel,
thank you very much for the inspiring material, i'm utterly grateful.
three points especially stuck me, and i would like to dicuss them with you, if you care.
Firstly, what you say in the email itself:
maybe the paradox is the attempt to approach neutrality neutrally. especially since anyone studying graphic design history knows that the values of neutrality are inherited, not given, it seems a subject impossible to tackle without some form of premeditation.
i am totally aware of the fact that something completely new and novel cannot ever be percieved as neutral, that it always must be a reflection to what we -- and "we" being a relatively small group in space and time -- know, what we are used to. that's why my approach is to analyse features in existing typefaces, or rather: typeface genres, and question them to determine what can be considered neutral and what can not. and here, actually, is where my own neutrality ends: it is *me* who has to answer these questions, and that means, despite my trying not to, my experiences, taste, convictions come into play. i actually had a bad feeling about this personal involvement, but if i understand you correctly, "the paradox is the attempt to approach neutrality neutrally", it would be impossible anyway to perform the task the way i would ideally want to do it. phew!
Secondly, just to prevent any misunderstanding, I would like to point out that I am very well aware of the fact that any "neutral" design does not *not* make a statement, but that it, in trying so, makes a very *strong* statement (in line with Paul Watzlawick's communication theory, and the impossibility of non-communication). But a neutral typeface, as opposed to "neutral graphic design", may be less impossible to approach (approach, as opposed to "reach"): there *are* typefaces that are definitely not neutral, and there are typefaces that are much more neutral, etc.
And thirdly, i must disagree strongly with the conclusion of your white flag lecture:
It seems that, with the United Nations as a corporate identity, the Twin Towers as a logo and the Stealth bomber as an invisible piece of design in mind, these strange ideas about honesty and innocence have to be reconsidered. Invisibility, from now on, means bad intentions and evil plans.
just because you mentioned a few examples where "neutrality" and "invisibility" can have negative effects (or connotations), you should not convict the whole concept of "bad intentions and evil plans", as you put it.
Let me, in turn, quote German designer Dieter Rams, who was once the head of the product design department of Braun: "We go on the premises that people want to put on their breakfast table a machine to roast bread, not something that epitomises the hopes and fears of their generation."
What I am trying to tell you is that i am convinced that the means of a "neutral" or "invisible" design do not necessarily mean objectionable ends...
all the best, and thank you again for your valuable input.
kai bernau
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | March 31, 2005 15:06:10 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
dear kai,
thanks very much for your response. please allow me to react briefly to some of the things you brought up:
quoting:
just because you mentioned a few examples where "neutrality" and "invisibility" can have negative effects (or connotations), you should not convict the whole concept of "bad intentions and evil plans", as you put it.
is it not that in design, 'transparancy', 'invisibility' and 'neutrality' have strong moral connotations? and is it then not in itself relevant that in one way or another, there turn out to exist design examples of neutrality and invisibility where these are used to totally different ends, with opposite meanings, just as there exists functionality vs. sabotage?
and is it not more than just a coincidence that these design examples of, for instance, politically sensitive invisibility, turn out to be more recent than classical, where the reliance on hidden characteristics for instance -- as in the biometric passport from this fall on required to travel to the US; reasons: 'terrorism' -- implies an increase of control, as I put it, 'bad intentions and evil plans', rather than the 'good neutrality' or 'benevolent invisibility' of modern design?
furthermore:
let me, in turn, quote German designer Dieter Rams, who was once the head of the product design department of Braun: "We go on the premises that people want to put on their breakfast table a machine to roast bread, not something that epitomises the hopes and fears of their generation."
I totally admire Dieter Rams, and I think that his product design for Braun does epitomise some hopes and fears of his generation of designers. for instance, the hope for designed neutrality, the hope of having well-designed consumer products available for the masses. there is a great deal of idealism to the work of Rams which is perhaps all in service of neutrality, but still an ideal, a 'soul'. so the machine to roast bread is not neutrality, but Rams's subjective position, desire, and finally also his design brand. let me be clear: I endlessly prefer Rams's work (alarm clocks, cupboards, transistor radios, coffee machines, etc. etc.) over the horrible stuff of Philips Design culminating in the highly succesful Senseo coffee machine, that has behind it the concept that people secretly yearn for a butler (that's why it is slightly bending), which is in a way the servile position of design now no longer embedded in the design mentality, but personified by the product. eventually that's maybe also its strength.
and then:
Secondly, just to prevent any misunderstanding, I would like to point out that I am very well aware of the fact that any "neutral" design does not *not* make a statement, but that it, in trying so, makes a very *strong* statement (in line with Paul Watzlawick's communication theory, and the impossibility of non-communication).
But a neutral typeface, as opposed to "neutral graphic design", may be less impossible to approach (approach, as opposed to "reach"): there *are* typefaces that are definitely not neutral, and there are typefaces that are much more neutral, etc.
well, I don't know, it seems that your argument up to now is rather classical. there exists a whole array of typefaces that try to make fun of Helvetica, like for instance Go To Hellvetica. this proves that Helvetica is maybe not seen as neutral, but at the very least as 'given'. I think nowadays you could regard for instance Helvetica as a 'given' typeface; it's everywhere, the voice of mobility, the voice of early globalization, Helvetica is the voice of modernity. I always have to think of the move of Adrian Frutiger to call his typeface Univers; that means something like 'for Max Miedinger ... only Switzerland ... for me ... The Galaxy!'
in the end Helvetica is better.
best regards
daniel van der velden
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | April 5, 2005 14:09:17 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
dear daniel,
thank you again for your continuing input, it has been very valuable to me. it took me some time to think about all you said, and very much unlike last weekend when we met at the WDW, i would like to say now that i agree with most of what you say:
there is indeed a negative side of neutrality that was not obvious to me before; just to take Switzerland as an example -- which is deeply rooted in my social origin: During WWII, as in all time before and after that, Switzerland pursuited neutrality, giving asylum to Germans persecuted by the Nazis ("good", except for the Nazis), but at the same time, allowed the German regime to deposit their money in their banks ("bad", except for the Nazis). So i guess i just didn't see how right you were with your statement of the, at least, ambiguity of neutrality.
is it not that in design, 'transparancy', 'invisibility' and 'neutrality' have strong moral connotations? and is it then not in itself relevant that in one way or another, there turn out to exist design examples of neutrality and invisibility where these are used to totally different ends, with opposite meanings, just as there exists functionality vs. sabotage?
and is it not more than just a coincidence that these design examples of, for instance, politically sensitive invisibility, turn out to be more recent than classical, where the reliance on hidden characteristics for instance -- as in the biometric passport from this fall on required to travel to the US; reasons: 'terrorism' -- implies an increase of control, as I put it, 'bad intentions and evil plans', rather than the 'good neutrality' or 'benevolent invisibility' of modern design?
daniel, is it okay with you if i quote the above paragraph in my research/meditational graduation book? I would like to show how much different people's opinion on this phenomenon differ.
I totally admire Dieter Rams, and I think that his product design for Braun does epitomise some hopes and fears of his generation of designers. for instance, the hope for designed neutrality, the hope of having well-designed consumer products available for the masses. there is a great deal of idealism to the work of Rams which is perhaps all in service of neutrality, but still an ideal, a 'soul'. so the machine to roast bread is not neutrality, but Rams's subjective position, desire, and finally also his design brand.
Anything that, and anyone who, desires not to make a statement, implicitly and because of that desire, makes a statement?
But a neutral typeface, as opposed to "neutral graphic design", may be less impossible to approach (approach, as opposed to "reach"): there *are* typefaces that are definitely not neutral, and there are typefaces that are much more neutral, etc.
well, I don't know, it seems that your argument up to now is rather classical. there exists a whole array of typefaces that try to make fun of Helvetica, like for instance Go To Hellvetica. this proves that Helvetica is maybe not seen as neutral, but at the very least as 'given'. I think nowadays you could regard for instance Helvetica as a 'given' typeface; it's everywhere, the voice of mobility, the voice of early globalization,
Helvetica is the voice of modernity.
of course i am perfectly aware of the fact that there is no neutral typeface, and that i can not make one. the whole thing is loaded with bits of eastern philosophies now (the way being more important than the destination (lao tze), or: "the sound of onne hand clapping", if you understand), but I think that i can only fully find our about it in trying to make one, and in failing to do so.
i'm not sure if i understand what you say "it seems that your argument up to now is rather classical". would you care to elaborate?
in the end Helvetica is better.
(than Univers)
you're just trying to provoke me, right? :-)
as said above, I would like to include an excerpt from your mail into my "meditation" book about The Neutral Typeface (although i am not coompletely sure yet which one). It is of course a complete non-profit ("financially desastrous" will probably be more to the point), studenty thing, self-produced and self-"published", but i will try to send either a copy of it, or another materialisation of my project, your way in the end. is that okay with you?
thank you again for your valuable insights
kai bernau
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | April 7, 2005 20:09:02 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
dear kai,
thanks for your response. I appreciate what you are writing me.
if neutral originally means neither the one, neither the other, then it is a kind of ambiguity as well. I'll elaborate some more after the weekend, and you're free to quote as long as I'll receive a copy of your thesis project when it's finished; that would be just great.
these exchanges are very insightful to me as well,
best
daniel
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | April 14, 2005 12:10:45 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
On Apr 7, 2005, at 20:09, Daniel van der Velden wrote:
thanks for your response. I appreciate what you are writing me.
if neutral originally means neither the one, neither the other, then it is a kind of ambiguity as well.
I'll elaborate some more after the weekend, and you're free to quote as long as I'll receive a copy of your thesis project when it's finished; that would be just great.
these exchanges are very insightful to me as well,
dear daniel,
it was in my plans from the beginning to give a copy of my book to every contributor as a token of gratitude; i recently learned about the prices for printing this book ... ouch! (it will be roughly 120 pages, print run 25-50 copies, and so that it lies flat on a table it needs to be sewn). so i will have to find creative ways of minimizing my expenses there, especially in the light of the *other* expenses i will face for my exhibition.
you wrote:
if neutral originally means neither the one, neither the other, then it is a kind of ambiguity as well.
indeed. i'm very happy i came to understand that -- it might be at least an interesting by-product to play with this theme.
the progress on the book slowed down in the last two weeks, i had amassed enough parameters to start working on THE NEUTRAL TYPEFACE (and it's working out quite well). I'll concentrate more on updating/adding to/correcting the book when i'm a bit further in the type design process -- right now i'm only "debugging" it.
looking forward to hearing from you again,
best
kai
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | May 25, 2005 01:12:51 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
dear kai,
thanks for your note. I have been abroad a lot and wasn't able to respond any sooner.
some time ago you wrote:
thanks for your response. I appreciate what you are writing me.
if neutral originally means neither the one, neither the other, then it is a kind of ambiguity as well.
I'll elaborate some more after the weekend, and you're free to quote as long as I'll receive a copy of your thesis project when it's finished; that would be just great.
these exchanges are very insightful to me as well,
This ambiguity-theme kept my head busy for some time, and it's great that you mentioned it. Thanks. It would be awesome if you could talk about it it a bit more, as you originally said.
I mean that we sort of think of neutrality as the ultimate clarity, like medicine packaging. A Swiss feeling. If actually neutrality would mean ambiguity, it would be more about something 'vague', more like a situation where things are not so fixed. Perhaps the whole redefinition of Swiss design since Lausanne etc. is about that,
OK now you tell me what you have thought about it since then!
As for the printed book, a lot has happened recently on which i would like to fill you in briefly: I have been looking for a way to get the book produced in a small number of copies (i was thinking maybe 25-50) to ensure that everyone who gave me his input will receive one and to sell the remaining copies at the exhibition to cover my expenses.
good idea.
It turned out instead that now ANDO printers in Den Haag would like to produce a small (but somewhat bigger than i originally thought) print run of about 250 copies, 100 of which i would receive and 150 copies for them to send out to their more "designy" clients.
fantastic! you should do this. you've done a great job here!
The good thing about this is, of course, that you will receive a perfectly produced copy of my graduation project (or two if you would like to give one to the JvE's library). But it also means that the conditions of publication have strongly changed from those you agreed to have you quotes included, so here i go asking again if that's still alright with you.
sure, I'm just curious in what way you will use our exchange.
My deadline for having the whole book re-set in my own typeface, edited everything and spellchecked my eyes sore and whatnot is May 30, so if you would like to say more on this topic, please make sure i get it in the next two weeks.
there is already quite a lot said in 'White Flag', which was until now never published. so you could quote from there. I believe I also sent you the powerpoint. I couild send you the Holland Festival sign as an actual illustration.
Then, there is also something completely different: I had the plan to "test" my typeface in the real world (part from the book i mean), so i'm currently offering my typeface to designers for free, if they use it to design a poster that i can show during my exhibition
It can range from anything to a real assignment to a free project to a drunk saturday night layouting battle with your intern. if you're not printing the poster anyway, you'll receive a printout from an Epson large format printer. And of course, you receive a full license for the typeface that includes a life-long free upgrade plan (meaning that you will receive additional weights etc as they appear).
So if you're interested in that, I would be more than happy.
actually the typeface crisis is ongoing and permanent. therefore I would love to receive your typeface and test it.
many thanks. I'm sorry to have kept you waiting but I was just too busy and often away.
good luck with everything and speak soon,
best
daniel
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | May 25, 2005 13:04:00 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
Dear Daniel,
thank you so much for your mail. It arrived at exactly the right moment.
OK now you tell me what you have thought about it since then!
What I have thought about:
1. Tho whole discussion has got a bit mudled up, we are talking about "neutral" typefaces and "neutral" typography and their quite different intentions as if they were the same. I think, though, they deserve to be treated differently, although they have a lot in common: Neutral typography or design "N'existe pas", just like there can not be a truly neutral typeface. Both of these hypothetical entities can be used (my apologies for the amount of pathos) "for good or evil purposes" -- either to deliver a message with clarity, or to give only the feeling of openness and accessibility.
The fundamental difference is that a (neutral) typeface is a means, a tool, while the (neutral) typography it is used for is an ends: a typeface can support, counterbalance, contrast, subvert the message of a text, but in itself, the neutral typeface carries no message (or at least tries not to). That's something that graphic design never does, and cannot ever do: Not say anything.
2. "neutral is the new vague": In your example with the medicine packaging, the "neutrality" and clarity of all the design components is aimed to convince the patient of the reliability and reputation of the pharmaceutic and its maker. while this can be perfectly honest, we see that this is a "style" that is used by hoax medication available on the internet, which (although i never tried) is not only very likely to be effective, but is potentially even harmful.
You once wrote
is it not that in design, 'transparancy', 'invisibility' and 'neutrality' have strong moral connotations? and is it then not in itself relevant that in one way or another, there turn out to exist design examples of neutrality and invisibility where these are used to totally different ends, with opposite meanings, just as there exists functionality vs. sabotage?
But this is not an isolated matter for neutrality. any prestigious or official (definitely not neutral) corporate design of, for example, a bank can be "stolen" and used to disguise countless fraudulent spam mails that claim to be from that bank, asking you to send them your credit card data.
In that sense, neutrality is just about as ambiguous as any "style" can be.
As for all the other things:
Until Monday, the typeface must be finished. A first high resolution proof on an image setter showed me what was still wrong and i'm halfway through fixing these things. I'm currently kerning it and building in some of the more obscure characters -- for now my goal is actually only to complete the characters i need for the book and i'm still lacking decent & signs and other odds and ends.
Until Monday, the book must be finished, too (thank god my girlfriend is in Chaumont for the weekend :-), i'm currrently writing on preface and a conclusion -- got a very beautiful text from Helmut Schmid today that I will incorporate there --, the apparatus, colophon, then fine-typography with my own typefaces, more spellchecking etc.
My deal with Ando is probably not going to go through, unfortunately, but currently alternatives are being evaluated, and i'm absolutely confident that i will have more than enough books to send out.
actually the typeface crisis is ongoing and permanent. therefore I would love to receive your typeface and test it.
I take this as your agreement to make a poster with my typefaces which i can show during my exhibition. Attached to this email are preliminary test versions of my typefaces. If you would like to use them, please wait for your license (which will come with the final pre-summer-holiday release in about two weeks) for anything that goes into production, and please do in no way distribute the typefaces to any other parties.
The poster can be for and about anything (i.e. from a real life assignment for a client to a late night drunk photoshopping battle with your intern), EXCEPT about the seemingly politically neutral position of Switzerland or about the typeface itself. Must be printable on 70 x 100 (portrait orientation preferred) or similar, anything that a Epson 10000 CF can print (if you are not going to have it printed, I will send you a epson printpout together withe the books), and be sent to me in data (PDF, indesign 3, xpress 6, illustrator or freehand) before June 16. I am excited what you will come up with.
So let me close this message by expressing how grateful i am for your help. You really went a long way with me and i thank you for your guidance and inspiration.
indebted,
kai bernau
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: interview?: neutrality |
| Date: | May 26, 2005 14:32:41 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Neutrality Listy |
(You are receiving this e-mail because you are in conversation with Kai Bernau on the topic of neutrality. If you think you should not, or prefer not to, receive these e-mails any longer, please simply reply to this e-mail with subject line "no thanks" or similar)
Dear everyone,
unfortunately, there seems to have been a major bug in some of the recent evaluation beta releases of the neutral typeface; due to a bug in fontlab when creating opentype class kerning features, in some cases the kerning between two characters can be up to four times as high as intended. i'm currently testing tal leming's wonderful MetricsMachine to generate the kerns, and updated versions will be sent out to you before the weekend.
sorry for the trouble
kai
| From: | Daniel van der Velden |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: neutral typeface bug |
| Date: | May 27, 2005 01:27:33 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Kai Bernau |
hi kai,
actually quite good to have 'bugs' in something neutral...
I wish you luck in fixing them and must say that from what I saw I really like the typeface...
best daniel
| From: | Kai Bernau |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: neutral typeface bug |
| Date: | May 27, 2005 13:34:39 GMT+02:00 |
| To: | Daniel van der Velden |
On May 27, 2005, at 01:27, Daniel van der Velden wrote:
actually quite good to have 'bugs' in something neutral...
haha! i agree, theoretically. but try write everyday words like "kewl" in indesign with kerning set to "metric": not so kewl.
I wish you luck in fixing them and must say that from what I saw I really like the typeface...
thanks. the problem is a bug in fontlab, and the workaround unfortunately triggers another bug (siiiiigh) and thanks for the laud.
i take it you will be going to / are in chaumont? have fun there!
nice weekend
kai