Half the letters of the lower-case alphabet—thirteen—are of the hight of the o, and we will call them the small letters. The letters with ascending strokes number eight, with descending strokes five (Example [502]). Because the descending letters are only five in number, they are most frequently picked out for mutilation. This sawing off of a portion of the descending strokes cripples the letters just as the sawing off of a portion of a man’s legs cripples his body. Not only is typography made imperfect by missing descenders, but, generally, the practice has worked toward the degeneration of type print, making it less easy to read, as the lines set too close together. When the descenders are of proper length they maintain a strip of blank space between lines, but when they are cut off the printer must add leads to recover the space—which he seldom does.
The printer and user of typography have been using false logic in favoring type-faces that have descenders cut off. They think they are getting more for their money when they obtain a normal twelve-point type-face on an eleven-point body, but as the one-point linear space must be restored by leading, there is nothing gained. Scientists, in the study of eye hygiene, have ascertained that a certain amount of space between lines is necessary to save eyestrain, and the descenders are essential in furnishing some of this needed space.
EXAMPLE 502
Of the twenty-six letters of the alphabet, eight have ascending strokes, five have descending strokes, and thirteen have neither
The descending curves of the lower-case g are a thing of beauty when allowed freedom (Example [504-A]), but on the shortened plan they resemble a man cramped with rheumatism, in need of crutches.
Proportion of Letters.—One of the elements in the beauty of the ancient Roman stone-carved alphabet is the proportion of its letters. Goudy, drawing lettering and designing type-faces modeled after the inscription capitals of the Romans, has had a large influence in reviving good proportion in type. Cloister Oldstyle (Example [467-A]), designed by L. M. Benton after Jenson’s letter, is an excellent study of the old proportions introduced in present-day type-faces. However, there is no type that has the beauty of proportion to be found in the Roman capitals (Example [464-A]) reproduced from an inscription on the Trajan column at Rome. The author has endeavored, in plain lines, to trace these capitals and show their proportions on a background of squares. It will be seen that the width of the letters B, E, F, L, P, S is less than half their hight, and about half the width of O, M, Q, C, G and D. It is this contrast in width as well as in shape that makes the alphabet as a whole so pleasing.
Comparison of the capitals of the six standard faces in Example [467] will show that “old-style” faces tend toward the old Roman proportions and that “modern” types, such as Bodoni Book and Century Expanded (Example [466-B]), reveal an effort to make the capitals as uniform in size as possible. Typewriter types are an example of what happens when this idea of uniformity is carried to its logical end. It is really not necessary to throw Beauty out of the back door as Utility is admitted at the front. Both can live happily under the same roof.
As will be seen by Example [507], the lower-case letters are made up of a variety of curved lines, and vertical, horizontal and diagonal strokes, the purpose being the same as that of having capitals of different widths, to make them when joined together in words readable and pleasant to look at. The word “minimum” is an example of unpleasant monotony in the repetition of similar forms.
