Conversation

I was surprised by some very odd typographic choices in Tufte’s new book. Halfway through, he explains: “Systematic regularity of text paragraphs is universally inconvenient for readers… Idiosyncratic paragraphs assist memory and retrieval” A fascinating idea—I’m not sure!
Image
Image
43
85
697
The tyranny of the grid! The tyranny of text-in-boxes! The oppressive constancy of text-in-boxes-in-rectangles! It is good to see attempts to systematically break this. “Nearly every paragraph in this book is deliberately visually unique."
6
10
97
Unsurprisingly, he draws a great deal on typographic ideas from poetry, but his ideas about “text matrices” seem mostly influenced by principles of information architecture.
5
6
48
After your last rec in favor of Tufte, I've gone through all of his books again (and need to write a retrospective), but these text matrices bug me! Unnecessary combinatorial explosions seem like a sure way to make sure readers miss something, or to deliver unintended meanings.
1
1
For example from that page... "A useful typography displays these thesauruses." Wtf. It's the author's fundamental job to figure out what they want to say, and the most efficient/effective way to say it. Choose Your Own Adventure: Ad-libs With Nouns does no one any favors.
1
2
Replying to and
Different people “read” different metaphors in different ways. Sometimes you have to explain an idea to person a differently than person b. If there is a succinct way to communicate a single idea in multiple dimensions that strikes me as more eloquent even if more words are used.
2
But this is the exact opposite problem, too few words are being used to describe too many ideas! In the example, the first list has 6 items, and the second has 9! That's 54 different combinations! Did Tufte consider and intend them all? Is the reader supposed to?
1
Show replies