Does Surrealism have a Typographic Language?

I have been reflecting on the connection between typographic styles and broader movements in art and architecture.

For many historical periods, there seems to be a fairly clear typographic counterpart: for example, Renaissance and humanist typefaces, Modernism and geometric sans-serif typefaces, and so on …

But what about Surrealism?

Are there any typefaces, type styles or typographic movements that could seriously be described as ‘surrealist’? If so, what characteristics would distinguish them? Are there historical examples from the Surrealist period itself, or later typeface designs that embody Surrealist ideas typographically?

Or does Surrealism differ fundamentally from movements such as Art Nouveau, Art Deco or the Bauhaus, in that it manifests itself primarily through visual language, composition, collage and visual context, rather than through the design of the letterforms themselves?

Would you consider Surrealism a missing category in typographic classification, or simply a movement that never developed its own recognizable typographic language?

Comments

  • Yves Michel
    Yves Michel Posts: 241
    A Copilot search gave me some answers to your question.
  • John Hudson
    John Hudson Posts: 3,723
    Craig, your link to Fillmore is broken.
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,511
    edited July 7
    Craig, your link to Fillmore is broken.

    Thanks, fixed now I think. Florian, your "60+ Uses..." link returns "503 Service Unavailable" for me.
  • John Hudson
    John Hudson Posts: 3,723
    Surrealism’s immediate precursors, dadaism and futurism, certainly developed typographic dialects (in the layout of text, rather than in identification with specific styles of type). I wonder if surrealism engaged less with text because those movements had already explored type as a disruptive medium pretty thoroughly?
  • Florian Hardwig
    Florian Hardwig Posts: 296
    edited July 8
    Florian, your "60+ Uses..." link returns "503 Service Unavailable" for me.
    Thanks, Craig. It had a sorting parameter that only works when being logged in on Fonts In Use. Now fixed.
  • Nick Shinn
    Nick Shinn Posts: 2,373
    edited July 11
    I proffer University Roman as a surrealist typeface. Although published much later, it’s based on the lettering of Ross F. George from the 1930s (the heyday of the Surrealist movement), stemming from the free association of his subconscious.
  • I was surprised to see this question here, as it is one of the questions I keep asking myself for ten years. Also I kinda think that I'm doing surrealist typefaces, in the sense of what surrealism tried to explore back in the beginning of the century. So… here's my 2cts.

    I think you guys think too much in terms of aesthetics. A typeface mimicking surrealist aesthetic would not be a surrealist typeface. As I think a typeface mimicking modern or post modern aesthetics are just aestheticizations of artistic real questions from those eras. Futura isn't about looking geometrical, it really embraces the modernist questions, and thinks about how a typeface, in its own way of being and functioning, could address those questions. Any destructed typeface from dafont isn't post modern, while Keedy is.

    From there, the question is not what surrealism looks like, but what surrealism is about? As @Craig Eliason said, surrealism is about the hidden meaning of reality. It is a deeply esoteric movement even if not really described as such, the same way Mondrian / De Stijl was influenced by Theosophy. Surrealists wanted to explore the unconscious, connect with this intrinsic poetic nature of the world, they would experiment with drugs, with spiritism, etc. But surrealists didn't want just to look like psychics, they wanted to be ones. So in order to produce a typeface in that sense, you would need not to think how could I do a typeface that looks like a psychic made it, but how could I do a typeface through psychic means? How could a typeface be influenced by how dreams work? How could a typeface be used by a drugged writer?

    Type design has a long tradition of engineer, Cartesian, logical thinking. Arriving here now (or at the beginning of the last century) saying that you did a revival thanks to a ouija board by talking to Francesco Griffo, would be mocked, not taken seriously, while it would be a true surrealist workflow. I've got the feeling that in type design, there's always this unspoken rule that there's real serious type design, and that if you don't meet those expectations, then you're either rejected, or at best, if the project is interesting, regarded as a kind of experiment fun to watch but not on the same level as a real typeface.

    Surrealism is attached to the hidden meaning of things. While in type design, the main perspective is that meaning is given by the author of the text. How could a typeface, a font family, explore unconscious territories? It's not an easy question that cannot be solved by pure aesthetic mimicking. It isn't natural for us to imagine a surreal type work. Type design is so anchored (and kinda still is) in the perspective of technical craftsmanship that the very idea of letting yourself dive into your unconscious to imagine a typeface would make you feel a bit ridiculous, because of type design's systemic cultural pressure. Then how can it develop, if one can't even picture what such a statement would mean?

    I think the most surrealist works, not in type design per se, but in alphabet drawing, would be asemic writing. First and foremost Henri Michaux's work, but also Christian Dotremont are true explorations of the unconscious of the alphabet itself. Even if Michaux never wanted to be associated with the surrealists (which was a movement under the control of André Breton's theories [see the rejection of René Daumal and Roger Gilbert-Lecomte]) Michaux has all the characteristics to be described as such. It gave birth to a project of mine, Michaux published by Plain Form. You can read the article describing the whole idea of this family here: Mystery, Michaux and Mystic.

    Then of course, if you're not afraid of esoterism, I guess that some things that inspired the surrealists could be seen as pre-surrealist perspectives about drawing. I'm thinking about John Dee's Enochian alphabet, channeled by angels in a state of trance, or the whole work of Austin Osman Spare and his alphabet of desire. Once again, I think mimicking those esoteric aesthetics would not make a contemporary typeface surreal. In order to inscribe a work into this heritage, you would need to explore their core perspective, and think about how it could deeply influence a contemporary type system.

    Another work of mine, Jester, could kinda be classified as surrealist I guess, as its whole way of working is rooted in a system not from our world.



  • Lukas Horn
    Lukas Horn Posts: 16
    Maybe not too relevant, but didn’t Dalí paint the Chuppa Chups logo? I wonder if he designed the lettershapes himself, or if he had help. But of course that more counts as marketing related work, not surrealism.
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,511
    I proffer University Roman as a surrealist typeface. Although published much later, it’s based on the lettering of Ross F. George from the 1930s (the heyday of the Surrealist movement), stemming from the free association of his subconscious.
    By this do you mean something more specific than playfully unconventional proportions/details? 
  • Nick Shinn
    Nick Shinn Posts: 2,373
    edited July 21
    Yes, I’m talking about doodling, about intuitive drawing.
    Abstract artist and action painter Jackson Pollock was a surrealist, in that sense (channeling a universal, Jungian subconscious, or so he thought)—against which the stereotype of surrealism is incongruous, representational images that suggest the symbolism of Freudianism, or the irrational paradoxes of Magritte. This stereotype of Surrealist art is nonetheless grounded in the “reality” of traditional Western painting with its development of (subjects in) a coherent, 3D spatial environment, that eventually led to photographic realism. Surrealist dreamscapes that nonetheless look realistic. 
    Note the capricious variety of George’s sequence of iterations in his Stunt Roman, down the link I posted.
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,511
    Worth noting that such “automatic drawing” was a key part of Surrealism from the jump—see André Masson, Jean Arp, Joan Miró. 
    IMO capricious letterform variety—pretty much an inherent part of commercial lettering practice (vs. typography)—doesn’t evoke Surrealism if it’s not attached to some motivation to make psychic connection, reveal poetic imagery, surface what is repressed in the practitioner, etc.