Typefaces of (anti-public-health) protest

« previous post | next post »

The first of eight in a partial survey:

See the whole thread.


  1. Philip Taylor said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 6:36 am

    <div class="comment" style="font-family: 'Zapf pandemico' ">Although I would not normally consider myself a eugenicist, I have to admit that the idea of requiring these idiots to be compulsorily sterilised did fleetingly enter my mind. But then I realised this, in this case at least, Darwinian selection will probably be all that is needed …</div>

  2. Alexander Browne said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 7:46 am

    I haven't followed the Typophile forum for about 15 years, but I still feel compelled to point out that these are all examples of lettering, not type.

    Professional hand lettering and sign painting is a dying art with printed signs taking over. At one point I heard the Disney parks were one of the last places to employ a large number of sign painters, but I don't know if that's still true.

  3. David Morris said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 8:07 am

    If these people only caused their own deaths, I'd be inclined to leave them to their own devices, but they will cause the deaths of those around, some/many/most of whom are trying to do the right thing.

  4. JJM said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 9:22 am

    Now let's have one for BLM and Antifa extremist protest typefaces.

  5. Jonathan said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 9:55 am

    @JJM: Why?

  6. Rodger C said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 9:59 am

    "BLM … extremist" says it all.

  7. Philip Taylor said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 10:16 am

    « One man's "terrorist" is another man's "freedom fighter" » — I think that the same might be said of one man's "extremist".

  8. Karl Weber said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 3:06 pm

    @Alexander Browne: Actually, each store in the Trader Joe's grocery chain employs one or more local artists to design and hand paint the many signs that decorate the stores. A unique and cool way of individually branding that adds to the mystique of Trader Joe's.


  9. Victor Mair said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 4:08 pm


    "@JJM: Why?"

    For parity's sake.

  10. Terry Hunt said,

    July 18, 2020 @ 8:21 pm

    @ Victor Mair

    Is it useful to maintain parity between right and wrong?

    By this I'm not seeking to privilege one or another "side" in a one-dimensional analysis of US politics (in which I am unengaged, being a European who has never been further west than Ireland).

    Rather, I'm suggesting that, despite a temporarily apparent correlation between the US's "left" and "right" (which may be entitled to a balanced presentation) and people's stances on matters like racially-directed violence and compliance with temporarily necessary public health measures, the real confrontation going on is between people who deny objective reality and the need for basic social co-operation , and those who do not.

    My earnest hope is that, while the small but vociferous minority of deniers claim to align with the "right", the reverse is not true and the more silent majority of the US "right" will, fairly soon, prove to be not of the same reality-denying mindset.

    If my hope is denied I fear that the likely couple of decades left to me will be spent coping with the world-wide fallout of the USA's ongoing collape, which like that of the Roman and Trantorian Empires will likely be slow but inexorable.

  11. Andrew Usher said,

    July 19, 2020 @ 8:38 am

    This isn't, I would assume, any coherent typeface, and treating them as such is in fun at best, in bigotry at worst. It's not easy to write a sign by hand, and it's no surprise that some kind of 'block letters' are normally used – but at least I would ensure they are uniform, to not look more illiterate than need be. I have no associations of this kind of writing with any particular political beliefs.

    I'd like to extend Victor Mair's answer "for parity's sake" to say that the lack of parity, it seems to me, is that everyone here would be willing to treat that BLM and associated left-wing protests according to what the protesters themselves believe or say about what they are protesting. From this thread it doesn't seem that these protesters are being extended the same courtesy: certainly they would not characterise their beliefs and protest as 'anti-public health' (I omit the second hyphen, should it really be there?).

    k_over_hbarc at yahoo.com

  12. Andrew Usher said,

    July 19, 2020 @ 8:42 am

    Terry Hunt:
    I'n not sure of your relevant political beliefs but the one thing I'm completely certain about is that the coronavirus pandemic will not cause the collapse of the US nor of any other society. Thinking on that scale (which itself is fine), the virus is just a blip.

  13. Rodger C said,

    July 19, 2020 @ 10:02 am

    the coronavirus pandemic will not cause the collapse of the US nor of any other society.
    "Cause" is a broad claim. I think it's giving a serious push to a process that's been ongoing for at least half a century. Also, "any other society" is a very broad claim as well.

  14. Andrew Usher said,

    July 20, 2020 @ 8:28 pm

    I don't believe any Western society has ever been brought down by disease and we've had many worse. It's safe to assume that pattern will not break.

    Unfortunately, political reasons have caused the virus to be treated in most countries as though it were much worse than it really is. If that does collapse us, it won't be attributable to the virus, but some latent instability that happened to be triggered by the reaction to it.

  15. Rodger C said,

    July 21, 2020 @ 8:46 am

    Andrew, I agree with you now that you've shifted from "any other society" to "any Western society." As for "latent instability," I would have thought that American society is, plainly enough, rife with patent instabilities, and has been since it began.

  16. Andrew Usher said,

    July 21, 2020 @ 9:15 pm

    Well, that is basically true but doesn't justify Terry Hunt's apparent bias I was reacting to: it's too easy to think that only the other side is biased. Indeed, that is probably the ultimate reason for the failure of political discourse.

    The word 'latent' as I used it is not in opposition to 'patent': it simply means that instability doesn't show up (not that the possibility is hidden) until some condition breaks down the status quo there.

RSS feed for comments on this post