Thank you for your comments. I appreciate your concerns that the use of the word ’sustainable’ here has been used loosely and a clearer validation should have been provided. The intention for this feature was to showcase a few examples of contemporary graphic design that communicate a sustainable message/intention/project/initiative; as you said - raising awareness.

By no means is this intended to undermine the true meaning of sustainability or of ecologically conscious design. The intention is to illustrate that when a sustainable project has been fully established the use of typography/graphic design can be powerful in communicating the message more effectively than alternative visual stereotypes often associated with this topic. When aiming for any sustainable design there are countless things to consider and appreciate, and if we were really to delve into the thought of typography being sustainable, one would certainly need to think more thoroughly. For example, if graphic work is printed, what paper should be used, what inks / print process and energy is to be used/wasted, and so on.

I believe a less ’serious’ look at the ability of Graphic Design, and in this context Typography, to communicate social/ecological issues has its own sustainable merits. I personally feel that to promote sustainable thinking, especially to younger graphic designers, through showcasing such examples of contemporary practice can only lead to positive thinking and motivation to implement this serious subject in the manner it demands.

Challenging any design discipline to become sustainable will prompt much debate, so thank you for raising these points. Perhaps, a more suitable title for this feature would have been “Typography ‘for’ Sustainability”.

Kate.

Although the idea of advancing the awareness of ’sustainability’ is one that probably needs every designer’s attention, calling typography sustainable in such a superficial way I don’t believe helps.

One of the issues with ’sustainability’, ‘eco-this’ or ‘eco-that’ is that the concepts are often perceived as fad tags, not as what they should really be understood as, concepts, perspectives, philosophies.

I (humbly) offer that calling typography ’sustainable’ without going deeper into what the author intends by attaching such an adjective to it does a disservice to the notion of sustainability.

Webster defines sustainable as: a). conserving an ecological balance by avoiding depletion of natural resources. b). able to be upheld or defended. c). able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

How is Bodoni, Garamond, Univers or Helvetica not sustainable? What are the criteria the author is using to designate the above work samples as ’sustainable typography’?

Don’t get me wrong. The work above is interesting and stimulating. The We campaign logo is smart and effective. My point is that if designers are to contribute effectively to making more people aware of the need to change our perspectives, to change the way we think of the context we are all in, if designers are to make a difference in the way we relate to our environment, we need to start thinking and acting more thoroughly about the topic.

cheers,
Vladimir.