Typophile - Shaker type - Comments

http://www.amazon.com/Shaker-

pattyfab — Sun, 11 May 2008 18:18:50 -0700

http://www.amazon.com/Shaker-Life-Art-Architecture-Hearts/dp/0789203588/...

This is the book I have.

I would suggest that the

mondoB — Sat, 10 May 2008 08:11:49 -0700

I would suggest that the best typeface to talk about Shaker arts would do so obliquely, with a very very spare but delicate nineteenth-century look...like Emigre’s Filosofia or ITC Bodoni Twelve...rather than a sans, which goes in the wrong direction, or any fonts they used to promo their products at the time...they used what was available and customary, and a very motley mix it was too!

It is worth looking at a

edward maddison — Fri, 9 May 2008 02:23:51 -0700

It is worth looking at a copy of shaker design It has a section dedicated to shaker “graphics”

Incidently the book was designed by derek birdsall who clearly felt monotype modern and clarendon were most fitting

’tis a gift to be

Hiroshige — Thu, 8 May 2008 19:42:28 -0700

’tis a gift to be free...

Looks like a typical Shaker chair to me William, well except the cane seat and the caps on the feet of the back leg’s ;) Those slats look right to me.

Shakers mastered the stylish slim tappered vertical while keeping horizontals under check (accent on upward movement of line), and adornments like pommel finials, and my favorite mushroom caps, (etc.) are neat touches to those lines. So I think Patty suggestion of De Vinne is just about right, the caps though seem a little bit too wide(?).

As fate would have it, I just ordered a copy of ’Seen and Received: The Shakers’ Private Art’, which is a book about the groovy graphic designs produced by the Shaker’s spirit Interpreters as they were known as (a.k.a. graphic designers). Hannah Cohoons kick @ss designs (tree of life, tree of spirit, etc.), would make an interesting theme for a Shaker font. So too would Semantha Fairbanks flouishes, almost blackletterish to me.

’Tis the gift to be simple,
’tis the gift to be free,
’tis the gift to come down
where we ought to be,
and when we find ourselves in the place just right,
’twill be in the valley of love and delight.
When true simplicity is gained
to bow and to bend we shan’t be ashamed,
to turn, turn, will be our delight
till by turning, turning we come round right.

Sorry here’s the corrected

William Berkson — Thu, 8 May 2008 18:28:33 -0700

Sorry here’s the corrected link.

Those slats don’t look heavy in three dimensions. They are only a quarter inch thick. Also the arch is because the sides have been cut down. In a usual chair they would be straight across and as thick at the sides as the middle. The middle being wider is probably for comfort. These chairs are incredibly comfortable to sit in, though they don’t look it. For a start they slant back and are relatively low to the ground.

The straight-on look here also looks heavier because of the shrunken scale of the picture.

Also those legs and rails are maybe half the diameter of usual ones.

The ’mission’ stuff, by contrast is often built of square, heavy oak planks.

I have a reproduction Shaker ’taped’ rocker I always read my morning paper in, and love it. Our dining table is a reproduction of a Shaker trestle table, now in the Fruitlands Museum. The top is only 3/4 inch thick and the legs 1 1/8 inch thick. And the usual heavy cross bar between the two legs is removed, and replaced with two light angle pieces. And the usual heavy bar foot is replaced by a light arch. It is the lightest dining table I have ever seen. The rocker is also much lighter than normal rockers.

I just checked on line, but all the reproductions they show of the trestle table are heavier, and often totally wrong. Many furniture makers call anything un-oramented “Shaker”, but there is a lot more to it. The authentic light dimensions are harder to make, and still be strong.

As Chris quoted above from the famous Shaker hymn, their belief was “tis a gift to be simple”. For them simplicity was a kind of sacred ideal, and the best of the real stuff just radiates that aura.

The link isn’t working

jupiterboy — Thu, 8 May 2008 17:41:48 -0700

The link isn’t working William. I’m very interested though in knowing what the real deal is.

Back hacked and now I see. Actually, this is what I’m specifically calling heavy.

Mark H., the real Shaker

William Berkson — Thu, 8 May 2008 17:24:47 -0700

Mark H., the real Shaker furniture is not heavy, but light. Here you can see some good pictures of the real stuff.

As you can see, it is light where the latter “mission” and arts and crafts stuff is relatively heavy. In fact it generally looks fragile, but in fact is quite strong, as it was so well made. One of the things they consistently did to change existing designs was not only to remove ornament, but to make everything lighter and finer, and have elegant proportions.

It is really a unique aesthetic, and one that I don’t think has really been created in type. So probably Patty’s ideas here are the best.

The closest anything comes is the early Danish modern furniture in the late forties and early fifties, which was influenced by the Shakers’ work. The Danish stuff is more slick and posh—though also very nice.

You are right, the more I

jupiterboy — Thu, 8 May 2008 16:51:09 -0700

You are right, the more I look the more I see. However there does seem to be some variance in the style, and some general shapes—like the back slats in a classic Shaker chair—that have a heavy feel and a modulation of line that informs other minimal craft movements. I’m Mark BTW, I use that screen name in all the forums I participate in—for better and worse.

’Jupiter’ neither of

William Berkson — Thu, 8 May 2008 11:08:26 -0700

’Jupiter’ neither of those are Shaker designs. Jeremy Tankerd’s Shaker is also not in the aesthetic of Shaker furniture and architecture, IMHO.

Areplos just looks like

jupiterboy — Thu, 8 May 2008 08:06:41 -0700

Areplos just looks like furniture (mission/arts & crafts/Shaker) to me for some reason, but it is interesting to get another perspective.

I think it is the stick legs with the flare/serif at the top.

Like this

http://www.shakerstyle.com/living_bowArmChair.html

http://www.shakerstyle.com/table_diningApron.htm

I find both Areplos and

pattyfab — Thu, 8 May 2008 07:37:52 -0700

I find both Areplos and Matrix look far too contemporary and “digital age” to really capture the spirit of Shaker design. You need something with a more timeless quality. The book I have uses Bauer Text initials as the display font which works beautifully.

It’s a trick to marry the concepts of simplicity, elegance, and craft. If you choose something too simple you run the risk of it looking dull (IMO Tankard’s Shaker falls into this category). Too “crafty” and it starts to edge towards kitsch. Personally, I’d use a serif and make sure it’s very carefully kerned.

For something contemporary

James Puckett — Wed, 7 May 2008 19:23:52 -0700

For something contemporary and simple, what about Matrix II?

I live just down the road

kentlew — Wed, 7 May 2008 15:46:17 -0700

I live just down the road from the Hancock Shaker village in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts. So I have some familiarity with the Shakers’ aesthetic.

You’ll have to decide whether you want to use type that evokes the qualities that we ascribe to Shaker furniture or whether you want type that is authentic to the Shaker community itself and the period in which original Shaker furniture was made. These are two *very* different things.

The qualities that most people associate with the Shakers — simplicity, spare elegance, functionalism, etc. — have been mentioned and there are a lot of contemporary typefaces that evoke those same qualities. I’m sure you’ll get plenty of suggestions for these.

However, the Shakers themselves were products of their Victorian environment when it came to their own printing and advertising. You can see this most readily in the seed boxes, seed labels, and herb labels, such as shown in William’s link above. Lots of different faces in quite a cacophony of styles, ironically.

As far as their bibles and such, these were printed with the text types that were current in the day — the DeVinne that Patty suggests is an excellent example. (This one: http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/bitstream/de-vinne/, not some of the others that come up in a search.) Nick Shinn’s Scotch Modern (serif) and Figgins grotesque (sans serif) are good contemporary versions of designs from this same period.

HTH

— Kent.

Abebooks has a copy of an

Gus Winterbottom — Wed, 7 May 2008 15:37:03 -0700

Abebooks has a copy of an 1899 Shaker Manifesto for $10, and the Hamilton College Library has online digital images.

(Later edit: The Hamilton Library images are quite good, and show a wide range of layouts and fonts.)

We’re not completely up on

Tell — Wed, 7 May 2008 15:10:14 -0700

We’re not completely up on the Shakers in Australia, so I’m not completely around this, but I keep thinking of Ralph Beyer’s simpler work. Just beautiful.

Shaker type

AshleySamantha — Wed, 7 May 2008 11:20:35 -0700

I am working on a project about Shaker furniture and am trying to figure out what Shaker type looks like. Does anyone know where I could find/see any examples of how the Shakers used to do type? I have been trying to find maps or bibles made by the Shakers but am having no luck.