Comments on: Inspiration: Eric Gill http://www.trendsettingdesign.com/2009/04/inspiration-eric-gill/ Graphic Designer & Website Design in Greensboro, NC Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:47:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Joseph Cotten http://www.trendsettingdesign.com/2009/04/inspiration-eric-gill/comment-page-1/#comment-1158 Joseph Cotten Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:56:24 +0000 http://www.trendsettingonline.com/?p=273#comment-1158 @Jean-Marie Clarke: thanks for chiming in! Good points all around. Fascinating business, this art of lettering, isn't it? I wrote this article using information taken from a MyFonts newsletter, which in turn pulled quotes from an old interview: An Essay on Typography (London, J.M. Dent, 1931); Autobiography (London, Jonathan Cape, 1940); Essays (London, Jonathan Cape, 1947) @Jean-Marie Clarke: thanks for chiming in! Good points all around. Fascinating business, this art of lettering, isn’t it?

I wrote this article using information taken from a MyFonts newsletter, which in turn pulled quotes from an old interview:

An Essay on Typography (London, J.M. Dent, 1931); Autobiography (London, Jonathan Cape, 1940); Essays (London, Jonathan Cape, 1947)

]]> By: Jean-Marie Clarke http://www.trendsettingdesign.com/2009/04/inspiration-eric-gill/comment-page-1/#comment-1152 Jean-Marie Clarke Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:32:36 +0000 http://www.trendsettingonline.com/?p=273#comment-1152 I am looking for the published source of the quote: “The shapes of letters do not derive their beauty from any sensual or sentimental reminiscences. No one can say that the O’s roundness appeals to us only because it is like that of an apple or of a girl’s breast or of the full moon. Letters are things, not pictures of things.” Can anyone help? As for this thing about letters being things, not pictures of things, all I can say is that, in my long experience in the world of art (historical and contemporary), the whole point of the exercise is in the resonances between what we rashly call "things" and how we picture them. In fact, there are no things independently from our pictures of them, and our pictures become things in turn... Very circular, and enjoyable: why try to break it?. This is another reason why Gill can say that "Legibility, in practice, amounts simply to what one is accustomed to." I am looking for the published source of the quote: “The shapes of letters do not derive their beauty from any sensual or sentimental reminiscences. No one can say that the O’s roundness appeals to us only because it is like that of an apple or of a girl’s breast or of the full moon. Letters are things, not pictures of things.”
Can anyone help?
As for this thing about letters being things, not pictures of things, all I can say is that, in my long experience in the world of art (historical and contemporary), the whole point of the exercise is in the resonances between what we rashly call “things” and how we picture them. In fact, there are no things independently from our pictures of them, and our pictures become things in turn… Very circular, and enjoyable: why try to break it?. This is another reason why Gill can say that “Legibility, in practice, amounts simply to what one is accustomed to.”

]]>