FRED SMEIJERS

Renard: an idiosyncratic type revival1

This article discusses the text Renard (1996), issued by The Ensched6 Foundry. This revival is bascd on a roman type by Hendrik van den Keerc (ca. of Ghent. Rcnard is -like. In this context 'Gara- mond' is a collective namc for romans made in the sixteenth century, and there- fore includes those cut by both French and Flemish punchcutters. I wish to make a few comments on revivals in general before returning to Renard.

WHAT IS A REVIVAL?

A type design that has gone out of use is sometimes adapted for modern type- setting techniques and reissued. Among typographers this new version is called a 'revival'. The English word is uscd in the Netherlands as well, because there is no Dutch equivalent. A revival is actually a rather flexible notion whose upper and lower limits are not well defined. It is usually something other than a fac- simile. At the Imprimcrie Nationale in Paris, for example, two hand punch- cutters are copying old punches as closely as possible. The type is cast in new matrices struck from these new punches. The originals are not used because they arc too easily damaged. This copying is carried out with great technical skill: eve under a magnifying glass one can see no difference between the smoke proofs of the historic original and the copy. Two factors that play a role in a revival are absent in a facsimile, namely interpretation and technique. I illustrate this with the example of . This Monotype revival from 1929 is based on printed samples from the end of the fifteenth century, because the punches and matrices of this type had been lost long ago. The type had to be made anew, and in the process many details were adapted for its use on the typesetting machines that Monotype produced and sold. Moreover, Bcmbo had to suit twentieth-century typographic conventions, whose requirements included an expansion of the fount with new characters (from supcrior figures to the dollar sign). The revisions and interpretations of the form of the type had to retain or even strengthen the character of the orig- inal ; otherwise is would have been a new type design instead of a revival. 53

Many years after Bembo had demonstrated its (commercial and intrinsic) value for letterpress printing, Monotype naturally wished to use it as the basis for a design for photographic typesetters, and still later for another for digital typesetters. The latter was therefore a revival of a revival. Each time, they had to make additional adaptations due to the influences of the various typesetting techniques on the letterforms. Meanwhile, other 'demands' had arisen within the world of typography, such as the use of various weights. With a type such as (1957), the numerous variations in weight and width form part of the original design, but what are we to do with such a forced and ugly design as Bembo Ultra Black? Someone actually made such a thing! Did the designer ever stop to think about why it had to look like that, or what purpose it actu- ally served? Doesn't such an expansion of an existing face likc: Bembo involve too many compromises? A good revival requires more than just technical skill on the part of the producer. Only a thorough knowledge of typographic his- tory can protect the adapter of historical types from such blunders as a Bembo Ultra Black. In general, large commercial firms marketing type (and certainly many small ones as well) are clearly oblivious to such questions. Every type design is mindlessly forced to fit a single procrustean bed because the manufacturers - wrongly - think that gives the greatest chance of commercial success. The only result has been giant libraries filled with more and more of the same. The respectable and professional approach as I imagine it is not practicable from a commercial point of view. So only financial independence can guarantee the necessary artis- tic freedom: the gentlemen with good steady incomes from secure jobs are quick to find a detail 'a bit odd', and rarely allow a design to ripen. Fortunately designers are no longer dependent on the manufacturers of typesetting equip- ment : they can finally make what they themselves want. I would do my col- leagues an injustice, however, if I didn't also say that there are of course many good exceptions to all that I have said here. As already noted, a 'revival' is a flexible notion, difficult to define. It is usu- ally regarded as a twentieth-century phenomenon, probably deriving from the Monotype revivals such as Plantin, and Fournier. But in fact every century has had its revivals. Letters, with their highly conventional forms, have a long life. The careful translation of existing material for an ever-changing technology is a perfectly normal matter. Surely no one could imagine that peo- ple would want to use completely different letterforms from one day to the next simply because the technology had changed. A revival can be a creative design, a real contribution.

THE RENARDREVIVAL

The Ensched6 Font Foundry's Renard is based on the lowercase of Hendrik van den Keere's Gros Canon Romein, cut in 1573 (illus. I). Soon after it was