Tactical Type

When Nichols discusses tactical type, he refers to to “bad type” as holding a rhetorical purpose; “bad type” can be used for strategic purposes that reveal a semantic association and “subvert a dominant structure” (52). Typefaces and the general descriptors that come along with certain typefaces, whether that be “fun,” “elegant,” or “direct,” can be used to impart meaning on a situation and thus have a strong rhetorical purpose. According to Nichols, bad type can become rhetorically useful as it can signify a “lack of pretension, a refusal to adopt conventions of taste and formality, or a homemade aesthetic” (52). He uses the example of Comic Sans, which is traditionally regarded as a “bad type” to illustrate the aforementioned point; although Comic Sans is regarded as unprofessional, it also is described as “friendly” and “human” (52). Thus, Comic Sans would be quite fitting for a church that is striving to foster a “friendly” environment (52). This made me think of my elementary school and the “bad types” (Comic Sans and fonts resembling Comic Sans) that were used on the posters on my classroom walls. However, the usage of these fonts were deliberate and had a rhetorical purpose in a classroom setting.

As a student who has very little experience in design and primarily writes academic research papers, this perspective doesn’t have a direct effect on my approach to writing as I shape the rhetoric of my papers based on writing rather than typography. However, I fully understand the role that typography can play in rhetoric when it comes to design, and I am excited to employ these tactics in this course. Typography is something I never thought I would be able to deconstruct on the level that Nichols does, and I enjoyed learning something new.

Question: Have you ever had a teacher allow a more creative font for a paper. If so, what font was allowed?