hi--im-alex

[hi--im-alex]

Troll Thread and The Serving Library

Troll Thread and The Serving Library are both doing interested things in the world of publishing, using low-tech means and what appear to be small teams. From the Troll Thread interview with Tan Lin on Poetry Foundation, the four TT publishers talk about how the platform is meant to be a home for orphan poems, ones that wouldn’t be as easily accepted in other venues (either due to content, format, or authorship). Chris Sylvester, Holly Melgard, and Joseph Yearous-Algozin curate the site, which seems to mean they solicit work from writers they want to publish, publish themselves freely, and do turn down unsolicited work. TT provides continuous access to the free PDF versions of texts, and readers can purchase the printed copies on Lulu.com if desired. It was interesting to read the publishers’ thoughts on whether or not people are reading the work. Instead of a traditional or full reading of a work, TT readers might be better called “tourists” or “browsers,” and the publishers seem okay with this, as they’re mainly interested in freedom to publish and continued access. 

From my experience on the TT site, I wasn’t necessarily drawn to any of the texts. The titles are the most enticing aspect, but as the publishers note, they devote as little labor to these publications as possible. TT is a side project for them, so they’re not spending hours upon hours in the creation or design of works. 

In contrast, The Serving Library bulletins are more attractive. They are lined up across the home page and include interesting titles and associated images. Once you click on a bulletin, there is a brief introduction, and the reader must then decide whether or not to download the free PDF. It appears that the site has been carefully designed, and from the description materials, it’s clear that The Serving Library publishers are concerned about curation, design, access, organization, and a systematic means of disseminating texts in the world. Like with a library, the purpose is to make the texts hospitable, to remind readers that they exist, and to help readers gain access to these. The rotating Caretaker supports these processes.

TT and The Serving Library represent the future of publishing: low-tech production costs; shared responsibilities across a variety of players; experimentation with form, presentation, and distribution. As with these two platforms, it could be that publishing continues to be a “side hustle” for many participants, as they work in full-time jobs and publish in bursts on the side when possible or when an interesting project presents itself. 

It also appears that these small platforms will be fighting for their readers’ attention. I read through one piece on each - and this was only because of the assignment. Once I got into the two PDFs, though, I was intrigued and wanted to know more. From TT, I read “Holly Melgard Reads Holly Melgard” by Holly Melgard. This introspective interview dialogue between the poet and herself was quite intriguing, as Melgard was able to ask herself questions about form, process, and content that probably no one else was asking her. She discussing issues of importance to her (and likely others), and some true feeling comes out as she doesn’t appear to self-inhibit or edit the discussion in progress or after. I also took a look at Muhammad Ali’s “WHY IS JESUS WHITE?” on The Serving Library, which is a transcription of a YouTube video of a 1971 interview between the athlete and BBC host Michael Parkinson. This archival seems to fulfill an important purpose, as the work (which includes Ali’s poignant musings on racism) might have been lost or buried amidst all the other content that keeps piling up. 

[hi--im-alex]

The Designer as Producer

There is a lot within Ellen Lupton’s “The Designer as Producer” that I agree with. For most of us, the distinctions between titles is not useful, as we are novices in many respects - still exploring and growing in the breadth and depth of skills needed to be accurately described as a “producer.” Lupton subtly underscores this point toward the end of her post, as she points out the myriad skills a cinematic producer needs command of in order to actually do the job of a “producer.” 

What is an important emphasis, though, is the practice of diverse and unfamiliar skills. For designers, this might mean starting a blog and working to create text alongside visuals. Or for writers, it might mean trying one’s hand at the layout of a zine or chapbook. The practice of other creative skills outside one’s wheelhouse is essential to creative growth, as well as to gaining a better understanding of the work of our collaborators. I felt this last night as I attempted to design the cover of my Frankenstein InDesign project. There were several frustrating moments at the beginning as I was confronted with my own limited skills. The experience made me consider and admire the work of my designer colleagues, which I oftentimes glance over quickly, and it furthered my own commitment to expand my skills as writer, editor, designer, producer, publisher, etc., even as I know that the learning process is long.

[hi--im-alex]

Authorship

“Ignoring such stern counsel, countless designers have kept at it anyway, embracing the tasks of writing, editing, and publishing alongside layout and typography” (59 Lupton).

This week’s readings were an important reminder of why I’m aspiring to expand my design skills. For the past several years I have watched others (mainly people younger than me) manipulate text on screens for both print and digital forms. This process is completely attractive, as design undoubtedly affects people’s engagement with content, and this is powerful! I’ve wanted to learn how to “engage the frame” more in written contexts, hence my desire to take this class and practice software skills. 

“It’s easier to play publisher if you know something about graphic design” (60 Lupton).

There’s a lot to be said for the joy of doing and trying out a variety of skills for different types of expression, even ones that a person wasn’t formally trained in. Professional titles such as writer or designer have been limitative in the past (and likely still are for many of us), as they restrict people from thinking they could take on a certain part of the process. But why is this, and what’s wrong with people pushing against this notion and trying on a different role - something beyond what they’ve always done before? Doesn’t this seem beneficial for the individual as well as for enlivening the work? Is there a term that encompasses a person who wants to at least try everything?

“To own the means of production is the only way to gain back pleasure in the work, and this, in return, is considered as a prerequisite for the production of (applied) art and beauty.” - from the Rollo Press website

I’m after the joy and the fulfillment that comes from an engagement of physical design skills. Coupling this with my writing and editing aptitudes, I hope to enter a new freedom of expression in presenting my ideas and those of others and spreading them in the world. If one can do “everything” in the publication process, at least to a small extent with rough experience, s/he can step into new realms of communication and sharing. 

“In the end comes the end product, but looking back we often find that doing the thing was the best part” (74 Lupton). 

[hi--im-alex]

Design Differences: Print vs. Pixel

There are advantages of designing and typesetting for electronic publishing. Perhaps the greatest is that writers/designers/editors have the ability to change the content and design as needed, even after it has been published. This means they can make corrections, additions, and even respond to reader/user feedback at any point. With print, once the content is physically printed, it’s unchangeable. Writers/designers/editors are then only able to make changes by hand, or to do another run with the alterations. This could be quite expensive depending on the size and complexity of the job. In order to print the most correct version possible, print publications must follow closely monitored schedules. 

Though some might view print design to be too limitative, Ludovico asserts that “publishing on paper, compared to publishing online, is a stronger ‘gesture’, one which creates the sense of an intimate (and definitely physical) space between the writer and reader” (115). Ludovico clearly highlights “print’s intuitive ‘user-friendly’ interface” (83), which print designers can take advantage of as they design for all five senses. In comparison, digital designers are likely to focus on the sense of sight, though Ludovico acknowledges that the iPad reading gestures is close to that of actual print reading (92).

My experience of working on the Frankenstein InDesign project aligns with Ludovico’s description of the aesthetics of print: “It usually aims for a more thoughtful and less spontaneous tone” (112). Each decision in the typesetting and design processes must first be thought-through and then tested and compared against other options. With these decisions and actions, the designer attempts to identify the best textual and graphical layouts and must anticipate their readers’ engagement with the actual printed version. This contrasts with electronic publishing, of which Ludovico describes as being “inspired spontaneity” (112). Consideration must still be given to each aspect of the design. However, the designer can hit “publish,” view the project on the screen, consider reader/user feedback, and then either let it live in the world or engage another series of design edits.

Discussing Amazon’s development of the Kindle, Ludovico explains, “Bezos understood that the challenge for any reading device will be whether it allows the reader to focus on the words and ideas, rather than on the technology” (87). This seems to be key for both electronic and print forms, as the main point is to help individuals engage with the content in the most efficient manner. It seems that print and digital forms help legitimize content in the world, which helps readers trust it. Whether designers are working on print or digital projects then, they must consider how to best situate the content so that readers can consume it with as few distractions and as much enjoyment as possible. 

Frankenstein InDesign Book Project

[hi--im-alex]

The Human Attachment to the Tangible and Associated Tensions

In the first chapter of “Modern Typography,” Robin Kinross explains that for the purposes of his discussion, “special attention is paid to those typographers who have been articulate about their practice” (13). He points to what seems to be an important distinction between pre-modern and modern printers. The pre-moderns primarily created products only, whereas moderns in the field created products and began to critically reflect on and document their processes. Kinross explains, “Modern typography exhibits a rationale impulse, both internally in ordering its own workings, and externally in the face it presents to the world” (16). Considering this distinction, it seems important to analyze what factors have enabled more printers and typographers to order their own workings.

Keith Houston’s “The Prints and the Pauper” article sheds some light on this, starting with an explanation of humans’ impulse to mark: “‘The action of making an impression, indentation, etc., pre-dates Gutenberg and his Bible by a huge margin, and if the Oxford English Dictionary is to be believed humanity has been printing for far longer than it has been writing books ... ’” and that “the human psyche has changed very little in the intervening millenia.” What has changed, though, are significant advancements in printing technology. Pauper’s article details the frustrations experienced by the early Chinese printers with movable type, Chinese ink and paper, and “an unwieldy written language.” These early printers went to great lengths to achieve marks on the page, and we can acknowledge how this would leave little room for documenting their own processes. 

Alessandro Ludovico picks up the discussion in more modern times, discussing printed marks on newspaper pages. In terms of documenting and disseminating the news, we observe individuals’ and groups’ intense commitment to the process; there are entire industries based off printed marks that preserve and spread happenings in the world. Here again, there is some tension in the desire to preserve and the means in which to do so. Ludovico writes, “This shift was eloquently expressed in Old News, an art installation by Michael Mandiberg. Every morning, the artist arrived at the gallery space with a stack of (fresh) copies of the New York Times, with the words ‘Old News’ cut out by laser in huge letters. The pile of now-unreadable newspapers steadily grew, symbolically demonstrating the worthlessness of stacks of unsold or unread copies” (58). Mandiberg’s installation points to a modern version of the tension. Though it is now quite easy to make marks on a page and share these in the world (satisfying the human desire), the frustration now lies in the impermanence of information and forms. Not only is the news changing on a minute-by-minute basis, but there’s also a challenge in finding the right form so that the marks are actually consumed by readers. 

What Ludovico describes as “the human attachment to the tangible” (54) seems inherent to our nature, and the advancement of printing technology helps to satisfy this internal desire/need. At different times in history, this has been easier to attain, hence some printers’ ability to enter into a critical analysis and reflection of their own work. As we now experience a deluge of marks on pages, questions on form and significance should be at the center of discussions on how individuals enact printing processes. 

[hi--im-alex]

Typography & Identity

Child Speech Pathologist

Used Car Salesman

Mechanical Engineer

Medical Student

Accountant

Transplant Surgeon

[hi--im-alex]

Typography: in Service of Enlightenment

“[T]he local weekly newspaper is the place where we come together, where we read the neighbourhood. The activity of reading, as Benedict Anderson puts it, may take place ‘in the lair of the skull’, but it has this social extension. We always read in common, with fellow readers.” - Robin Kinross, “Fellow Readers”

According to Kinross, typography is the material that makes content exist in real and graspable ways, not only in someone’s mind, but in the minds and worlds of many. Typography is the physical matter, the stuff of printed words, that enables what was once unseen to now be seen, grappled with, understood, agreed with, shot down, and a thousand other responses. Once visible, either in print or digital form, the once unseen content has a home. It stabilizes and becomes a reliable means of remembering what was once thought, explored, and spoken. Typography thus enables the content to live across times, cultures, and geographies.

With this understanding, the designer holds incredible responsibility, for he or she plays the role of getting content into as many spaces and minds as possible. This requires what Kinross describes as “innumerable small considerations.” If the typographic and other design choices are pleasing and effective, the designer facilitates the reader’s introduction to and engagement with content, whether it be a children’s story, work of non-fiction, or credible piece of journalism. Once this relationship between content and reader begins, so does the process of enlightenment. The reader enters the text’s world and will gain new frames of understanding. Knowledge can then be spread to others, resulting in a shared cultural dialogue.

“And so typography is part of the long haul of ‘enlightenment’: of making knowledge accessible and spreading it, or secularization, of social emancipation.” - Robin Kinross, “Fellow Readers”

How should typography relate to form? Each choice should aid in the process of enlightenment, making content accessible and moveable across minds and spaces. The discussion on this relationship should be updated to ask both designers and readers how more room for dialogue might be built into texts, as well as how the analysis of typography’s role can move from the “preserve of specialists” into a more open realm, where millions rely on type each day to understand and be understood.