Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Typo: A Monthly Newspaper and Literary Review, Volume 2

Design in Typography. — "Egyptian" Vignettes

page 33

Design in Typography.
"Egyptian" Vignettes.

Quaint and striking as the Japanese and Chinese ornaments were, they apparently failed to satisfy the demand—almost amounting to a mania—for the unconventional in ornament, which was at its height seven years ago. The « Egyptian » combination of Conner's Sons, brought out in 1880, we have already mentioned. It was cast to emerald bodies, and was not a success. Early in 1881, and almost simultaneously, the Johnson Foundry and Bruce's Sons brought out elaborate Egyptian designs, to pica bodies, which had a great run, and are still in use (and we regret to say abuse) in many job offices.

MacKellar's series was in three sections—four, really; for « Card Ornaments, » series 3, which appeared later in the same year, were really part and parcel of the same combination. The four sections contained in all 132 characters; and though, like other vignette series, they were not well adapted for borders, sections 2 and 4 contained pieces which might be so used. The MacKellar ornaments were distinguished by the same delicacy of engraving and artistic effects of light-and-shade which had made the preceding series so popular; but the designs being to a great extent architectural, an additional element of difficulty was introduced into the composition.

There are obvious reasons why architectural designs can never be satisfactorily worked out in type. Magnificent combinations have been designed containing pillars, pediments, friezes, and architraves; but it is only within a limited range that they can be successfully used. Type-borders must be applied to different sizes of page, and the least expansion or contraction, in either direction, of a well-balanced architectural device, destroys the proportion of the whole, and spoils the design. Another difficulty is that it is absolutely impossible to indicate perspective in movable type; and a third objection is, that wherever a « picture » is attempted with types, every piece being represented independently as regards light-and-shade, one of the first essentials in any general design—that the illumination should proceed from one point—is necessarily neglected. The casual observer may not know where the defect lies, but he is conscious that it does not look right. The untrained comp. finds none of these difficulties. It is the same to him when he builds a pillar in sections if it is a squat structure an inch high, or a telescopic erection six inches in length. A frieze adapted to a small octavo he will cheerfully expand across a large quarto—either side up, and will use it with equal satisfaction as foundation or superstructure. He will guard the steps of a Grecian temple with a Japanese dragon, and arrange the camel and driver and the pigtailed Chinaman in the same landscape, with perfect complacency. It is the artistic compositor who most fully realizes the difficulties these designs present—especially as he never overlooks the fact that the ornament must be subsidiary to the matter. Hence he rarely builds up a landscape, no matter what temptation the abundant characters may offer; but contents himself with a small central group, or corner vignette—no great result from such elaborate and expensive designs.

Used in this manner, the designs are legitimate enough. To attempt to exhibit a fourth of the pieces they contain would be foreign to our design; but we will introduce a few in illustration. First, as to running borders. For this purpose they are not to be recommended, there are so many designs that better fulfil the purpose. There are pieces, however, that look well set across the work that would not have a good effect if carried all round. Such as these:

The square piece is of universal application, as corner, border, or groundwork. The stem-piece is almost the only one that can be used all round the work as a running border:

The third section is noticeable for the great number of little pictures it contains—ships, animals, tombs, and temples. These are some of them:

If the compositor is not too ambitious, he may fill a corner or panel of his job very effectively with these characters.

Panel and corner-work is comparatively simple, and is the most appropriate. To cover a page with designs of this kind is injudicious. Looking at the elaborate specimens shewn by the founders, one is tempted to ask: Where is the matter intended to come in? In our first volume, p. 34, is a specimen of this class of decoration.

In composing these designs, the compositor must study the relative sizes of the objects. Neglect of this precaution has produced numerous examples of « perspective run mad. » A half-nonpareil change in the position of the background figures in the specimens above will produce a greater effect of remoteness than two ems pica in the foreground pieces. Here is a monstrous piece of perspective, from the specimen-book, the large pyramid in the middle distance. The nearest horseman, assuming the height of the pyramid to be five hundred feet, is a Son of Anak, a hundred feet high. To see over the top of the pyramid one must be in a balloon, but we do see over it, and twenty miles or so back we find a second horizon, with an obelisk and temples, of appalling height. Some comps, as with the Japanese designs, introduce variety by inverting sorts. Some time ago we saw a highly-adorned programme, with original perspective effects, in which a page 34cheerful aspect was imparted to the landscape by a number of tombs —all bottom up, like so many turned turtles. We are in no danger of hurting the perpetrator's feelings—we are pretty sure he doesn't read Typo, or any other trade paper.

Bruce's combination differed materially from MacKellar's. It contained 128 pieces, in one series, and while not so pretty or picturesque as the one we have shewn above, was more faithful to Egyptian models, and in all respects a better decorative series. It is exceedingly simple, and there is no attempt whatever at picture-building. It contains a great number of sorts which can be used singly with good effect, and very beautiful friezes and groundworks can be readily made up from the different characters. Many of the pieces—notably a set of zodiac signs, to 2-line pica, are in pure outline. We have not this combination, or we would illustrate some of its characteristic features and methods of application. Uufortunately, the intrinsic merit of Bruce's many beautiful designs is partly counterbalanced by the fact that they do not correspond with the standard body of any other maker. Measures must be specially set, and rule and justifying material specially purchased or cut, and carefully kept apart solely on their account. This is a great nuisance. When Bruce casts his ornamental combinations to the standard body, their sale will vastly increase.

Somewhat similar, and equally fine as a decorative design, is the latest of this class, the « Assyrian » combination, of 69 characters, also by Bruce. In its way it is unique. It is capable of grand effects in the hands of an educated and artistic workman.