With so much recent exploration in typographic form, a great many type-
faces in use today can be considered progressive. Often, however, the results
of this experimentation invite the mind to make concrete associations that
aren’t strictly evolutionary. Typefaces that feel inherently progressive fall
into two major categories: those with conventional structure but whose
details clearly explore fundamental mutation in the form, and those whose
structure differs dramatically from convention. In the first category, serif/sans-
serif hybrids with unusually shaped counters, terminals, and junctures feel
innovative because they use the conventional form as a basis and actively
seek to alter it. In doing so, they exude a sense of purposeful investigation
away from the historical form while simultaneously paying homage to it.
The second category includes typefaces whose characters push the limits
of legibility, approaching a level of abstraction or symbolic representation,
suggesting a new way of representing language altogether. Typefaces whose
strokes or counters are replaced by abstract graphic elements, whose overall
shapes deviate from the letter archetypes, or whose characters are simplified
to the extreme—even missing information important for recognizability—all
are attempts to evolve typographic form beyond existing notions.
In the design world, work that challenges expectation and points to new
ways of thinking about visual communication is abundant. Sometimes
the challenge comes as a test of legibility, sometimes as an unexpected
juxtaposition of content or color. Typography that attempts to see the
future through undiscovered technology or inventive use of form asks
what can be rather than showing us what already is.
Conceptual Type Revision
top, and detail, bottom
LSD
Sonia Díaz, Gabriel Martínez
Based on Avenir Roman,
designed by Adrian Frutiger
Madrid Spain
Progressive
Concepts
138
(Provision) Type Style Finder
CL905.042 / 4237
5 TSF_CNCPT 2_126–157_.qxd 9/14/05 7:46 AM Page 138