Enriched Narrative Text
The degeneration of text form and structure has always been the answer for quantity over quality. What happens if we reverse the course and focus on quality, now in narrative text? Responsive text could enrich narratives by adding contextual details. We could open the gate on corralled and oppressed letterforms in narrative text and counter “invisible text” (Unger 48) or inconspicuous text structure. The ideology of invisible text is to create a reading experience so unremarkable in context that the content is gleaned quickly without graphic obstacles.
It is this unremarkable and inconspicuous text that is apparently related to the problem in knowledge retention. Reading has become an optical scanning function so routine that no mental event is energizing cognition.
Creating a personalized visual voice with responsive text would be the polar opposite to the ideology of invisible text. Responsive text could construct a narrative experience reflecting the visual voice of the narrator by allowing the author to build context in the communication through text variations. The design of reading text would be prioritized to empower the communicator’s visual narrative through digital technology, providing flexible execution of structure and readable text. The graphic solution would be the visualization of meaningful personal context in the interpretation of the narrative.
What if each character on the page of a novel had its own font to reflect the personality of the character, thin and willowy for Scarlet O’Hara and thick and formal for Rhett Butler? Would simple text variations make Gone with the Wind more memorable? What if the “reader” could visual “see” an argument from the text context of bolder bigger lettering to reflect heightened emotions? In a Stephen King book, one could detect fear in the sculpting of the lettering, as if someone were writing it in the moment in a diary—shaky, fast, close together, uneven…. Already we associate the use of all uppercase lettering when texting to verbally shouting. We are reaching desperately grasping for ways to add more meaning to our letters when texting, why not innovate our typography than be unhappy with the capabilities we have?
With responsive design, narrative text could embrace nuances such as sarcasm, indicated in a reversed italic, or Sartastic, which would lean to the left instead of right. Emphasis could be achieved in degrees of boldness using flexible heights and weights. Basic communication could conjure all the typographic enigmas of personal handwriting plus more. Reading would not have to be relearned. The narratives would simply be richer, aided by contextual, second layer information. Responsive text would reflect inherent understandings: larger and darker conveyed with more emphasis; smaller or thinner achieved an understanding of quiet. Even sarcasm’s tilt of the head would be signaled in Sartastic. Responsive text would allow lettering to grow in meaning and reverse the stagnant development of our visual narrative text. The effect would add to the narrative and create a richer cognitive event giving narrators more tools to sculpt the feeling of the narrative in combination with content. With responsive text, self-typography has infinite options.
Responsive Texting
Now is the time for responsive typography, as today’s technologies are innovating new possibilities and broadening their capabilities to do more than ever before. For example, touch screen innovations have broadened the spectrum of tactile options and extending beyond the standard keyboard. The new iPhones and Androids further the potential for touch, extending control past touch to kind of touch expanding touch courses of interaction. These touch variations could allow text to be enhanced manually or become automatically reflective of touch. Digital communicators could rely less on gimmicks like emojis and acronyms to convey additional meaning and emotions. Imagine typing a message in an email or text; then touching a word to make it bolder, spread your fingers to make words larger for emphasis or double tap to make something Sartastic, denoting sarcasm. This capacity for adjustment allows your correspondence to reflect emotions and personality.
