If you mean the typical German blackletter typefaces created at that time. Here are some of the most used:

Tannenberg (1933–1935), Erich Meyer
National (1934), Walter Höhnisch
Element (1934), Max Bittrof
Potsdam (1934), Robert Golpon
Gotenburg (1935), Friedrich Heinrichen

The most "distilled" style was Schaftstiefelgrotesk (AKA "jackboot grotesk").
http://typophile.com/node/12130
http://luc.devroye.org/fonts-61629.html

I would consider Tannenberg the best representative.

BTW the style is now used by Neo-Nazis:
http://aryanwear.com/index.php/default/

However the Nazis later denounced blackletter and switched to Roman.

hhp

After the war, Jan Tschichold did a volte-face against Modernism, considering it to be a totalitarian exercise in social engineering, and disliking his previous role as its führer.

And who are today’s exponents of totalitarian typography?
Microsoft of course, with a corporate rather than political agenda, distributing Arial, Comic Sans, Verdana and Georgia to the world as Core TrueType web faces.
But that situation has receded with the introduction of @font-face.

Accusing MS of fascism is really out there. To me MS is one of the best things to happen to typography in the past decade or two.

hhp

But the Core Fonts didn't replace anything, they created a new solution. It was like adding plumbing to a frontier town.

hhp

Thanks everyone for your comments/information. My main theme for this paper I'm writing is the influence and development of typeface during WWII as a tool for propaganda and its influence. So basically I am going to consider the following points:
-improvement of type industry
-effect of typefaces in delivering propaganda
-Psychological effect of particular typefaces they are using and the reason they designed those specific typefaces
Basically I'm trying to create a timeline.
@Ralf h. : Thanks very much for the information and the dates. Definitely helps a lot.

"You don’t think the TrueType core web fonts were totalitarian [Microsoft's market dominance-related squat]?"

Hu?

In 1986, Adobe published their first PS printer boards, which at Steve Jobs insistence, contained Linotype fonts, and one they made themselves.

Then in '88 or so, Apple relicensed the same designs on the same widths from Linotype, for TT development in Mac OS VII.

Then in '90, or so, MS licensed the same designs on the same widths from Monotype, in TT for Windows 3.0.

Then, the web was founded in '94 based on default fonts and them yoyos would have used anything.

Sounds like democracy to me.

Sounds like democracy to me.

95+% of the browser market sounds like monopoly to me, which can happen in a democracy.
That is why Verdana and Georgia were everywhere.

Can we say that their typeface reflected Nazi's official ideology?

Can we say that their typeface reflected Nazi's official ideology?

Perhaps, but you would have to do so in relation to the concept of Völkisch.
But note that the Blackletter style is not inherently fascist, only in conjunction with its traditional use in Germany. And as I suggested in the linked thread above, because the communists had adopted the modernist sans as their style.
Elsewhere in non-fascist countries, they had their own folksy culture, such as Little England with its Olde Shoppes with “Old English” blackletter.
In the Anglosphere, blackletter was popular for newspaper mastheads, e.g.

Blackletter typefaces have a rich and beautiful history. It always makes me very sad to see people associate them with WWII and WWII only. That is soooo unfair, and these typefaces do not deserve such ignorance.

I've handled it (to observe Burke's execution of optical scaling) but not read it.

Pike, I agree. That's why I always mention that the Nazis were in fact disloyal to blackletter.

hhp

@J Weltin:
And to Futura, much to the dislike of Paul Renner …

Indeed. The instructions inside the lid of the Enigma are in Futura.

Nick... Depends on who made the decision. 95%? Hmmm.

I never really understood this edict anyway. After all, Hitler was a racist, and he wanted to promote everything German as being superior. Why, then, would he ban something so obviously viewed upon as German (although not true as such, as there was no Germany before 1871, and blackletter fonts were used in many countries all over Europe during the course of history), and go with something relating to Latin origin (the Romans, and therefore, from his perverted point of view, the wrong race).

I mean, Stalin, who was not only a communist, but also a nationalist, would never have replaced Cyrillic with Mongolian now, would he?

I heard that somehow Hitler thought that especially the Schwabacher was created by a Jew, which later turned out not to be true - can anyone enlighten me on that point?

@hrant - thanks for pointing that out. I just LOVE Blackletter typefaces, as well as old German handwritings, and usually designs containing such fonts are being rejected because of "Nazi associations" :-/

> -Psychological effect of particular typefaces they are using and the reason they designed those specific typefaces

Our ancestors have been driven into madness by diabolical type.
That is one of the dark secrets about WW II.

And the horror is still amongst us

@Werfer:
Why, then, would he ban something so obviously viewed upon as German

The usual answer was that using Fraktur made German propaganda unreadable to foreign-language audiences. So they made up a story about Fraktur really being a "Schwabacher-Jewish" design.

Of course, that begs a question: why on Earth not just continue using Fraktur for German, and Roman type for printing in other languages? But I think the answer is clear: Germany under the Nazis was such an absolute dictatorship that it was not enough to make a more sensible rule; everything had to be black and white, all-or-nothing, to fit with the desired mentality of obedience without thought.

@ Pablo Impallari
This "Organisationshandbuch" is exactly what its title says, an overview of the structure and subdivisions of this party. It shows emblems etc. by which these are identified. This does not make it a design manual though. (Even if e.g. Mr Heller thinks so.)

@ John Hudson
Hello John, Nick is right about Tschichold's remark about New Typography and totalitarianism. See the chapter "Exile" in Christopher Burke's "Active Literature": "Its [New Typography's] attitude conforms most particularly to the German bent for the absolute, and its military will to order and claim to sole domination reflect those fearful components of the German character that unleashed Hitler's rule and the Second World War. This became clear to me only much later, in democratic Switzerland." (P.293. From Tschichold's "Glaube und Wirklichkeit" which was part of the Tschichold/Bill dispute as Jürgen said.)

Andreas Stötzner: «Our ancestors have been driven into madness by diabolical type. That is one of the dark secrets about WW II.»

I sure hope Guido Knopp and Christian Brückner will enlighten us on this matter in their current ZDF history soap opera «Geheimnisse des Zweiten Weltkriegs» :) Maybe Lovecraft was right in that certain shapes are intrinsically evil after all ...

I think the amusing thing about Tschichold is that he was equally dogmatic in his modernist and anti-modernist phases, at least in theory. In practice, he was a real master in whatever style he worked in. I think others did adopt the modernist style and adapt it. Didn't this evolve into the 'international style' of the '60s? It seems like every style has its fanatics, who use it badly or where it doesn't work, and eventually drive it out of fashion...

Tschichold was a black/white kind of person throughout his life, and a pretty self-confident one.*
With this in mind, it indeed helps to not take every single word or argument too seriously (designers and arguments aren't necessarily best friends anyway) and read his comments as saying something about a certain spirit, as John said. I think there is something to it, at a more abstract level, in that New Typography and Nazism are 'movements' and as such share some common features.

* Bill, appalled by what he considered as a reactionary move of Tschichold, started his attack on Tschichold by referring to him as "one of the known typography theorists". Tschichold, in his reply, was not shy to point out that he is not "one of" but "by my best knowledge the only one".
(Today I found a copy of Bosshard's Bill kontra Tschichold. Bosshard's essay and Hochuli's shorter afterword provide some information about the context, including some funny quotes from a letter of Bill to Paul Rand about the matter. Recommended.)

From what I've observed in the past few years even inside Germany things have been -thankfully- easing up.

hhp

Yeah, I understand. But that's really sad once Blackletters are (to my taste) more beautiful when in black color. I hope this feeling disappear in future German generations. The more we use it in different contexts, the faster it will disappear. Let's free those beautiful letterforms ;)

I gave the headlines a blue gradient to relieve my discomfort. ;-) This way it looks less like 1930s propaganda.

The design of the book Fraktur mon amour also cleverly subverted the National Socialist associations of blackletter.

Well remembered, but this is also sad once this book is in German language only and they have no plans to translate it to english. Even so I am willing to buy it. An Oscar for anyone to translate it.