Fernand Baudin: Difference between revisions

From creative crowd wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "==The Visual Editing of Texts== Visible Language XVIII/1 (1984) https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5378/4242 <blockquote> “The idea I want to develop here can be expressed briefly as the argument for analyzing, studying, and describing text pages as configurations of columns and lines and as constellations of alphabets.” </blockquote> <blockquote> “Given the circumstances this may prove a decisive step towards meeting, if not solving, the innumer...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
==Typography: Evolution + Revolution==
The Journal of Typographic Research, Volume 1.4 (1967)<br>
(Later changed name into "Visible Language")
https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5010/3874
<blockquote>
“When I read a piece of printed or written matter, intelligibility is a question of understanding or senselessly fumbling around the would-be message.”
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
“First: writing is more than a technology, an artistic or manual accomplishment; it is a rational method for the proper design of intellectual instruments and social links. Second: total format of any piece of writing as an object (manuscript, imprinted, or otherwise) is at least as significant as any single aspect of the document.”
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
“Typography took over a scriptorial tradition in full vigour. What happened in the course of the typographical evolution of writing? To put it very briefly, writing masters disappeared from the universities (perhaps there was some connection between their withdrawal and the discarding of Latin for teaching purposes?) . From the point of view of status, the liberal arts were superseded by science. The care for typography as writing - as a mental, intellectual discipline- rested more and more with printers who, on the whole, were less and less learned people (more mechanized scribes, so to speak). Finally writing as a part of learning was altogether neglected.
This is obviously an oversimplification. To be a little more precise: after Gutenberg, the transmission of the scriptorial tradition took effect through the agencies of writing masters, printers, and typefounders. Authors cared less and less. Printers gradually became immersed in industrial and managerial problems. The typefounders alone could not be expected to keep the tradition alive. They can only ensure that their types are properly designed; they cannot enforce the intelligent arrangement of text matter. This applies also to the typefounders' new competitors: the computerised composing machines.”
</blockquote>
==The Visual Editing of Texts==
==The Visual Editing of Texts==



Revision as of 08:07, 14 July 2023

Typography: Evolution + Revolution

The Journal of Typographic Research, Volume 1.4 (1967)
(Later changed name into "Visible Language")

https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5010/3874

“When I read a piece of printed or written matter, intelligibility is a question of understanding or senselessly fumbling around the would-be message.”

“First: writing is more than a technology, an artistic or manual accomplishment; it is a rational method for the proper design of intellectual instruments and social links. Second: total format of any piece of writing as an object (manuscript, imprinted, or otherwise) is at least as significant as any single aspect of the document.”

“Typography took over a scriptorial tradition in full vigour. What happened in the course of the typographical evolution of writing? To put it very briefly, writing masters disappeared from the universities (perhaps there was some connection between their withdrawal and the discarding of Latin for teaching purposes?) . From the point of view of status, the liberal arts were superseded by science. The care for typography as writing - as a mental, intellectual discipline- rested more and more with printers who, on the whole, were less and less learned people (more mechanized scribes, so to speak). Finally writing as a part of learning was altogether neglected.

This is obviously an oversimplification. To be a little more precise: after Gutenberg, the transmission of the scriptorial tradition took effect through the agencies of writing masters, printers, and typefounders. Authors cared less and less. Printers gradually became immersed in industrial and managerial problems. The typefounders alone could not be expected to keep the tradition alive. They can only ensure that their types are properly designed; they cannot enforce the intelligent arrangement of text matter. This applies also to the typefounders' new competitors: the computerised composing machines.”

The Visual Editing of Texts

Visible Language XVIII/1 (1984)

https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5378/4242

“The idea I want to develop here can be expressed briefly as the argument for analyzing, studying, and describing text pages as configurations of columns and lines and as constellations of alphabets.”

“Given the circumstances this may prove a decisive step towards meeting, if not solving, the innumerable challenges of the Computer Age.”

“Everybody benefits by being more alert to the fact that the visual editing is not part of any medium but must be made part of any text.”

“If it is difficult, this is only one more reason why visual editing should be taught generally.”