Bringing Together Bringhurst and Budweiser

I love a reading like Robert Bringhurst's writings on the principles and tactics of typography. Though it's really not the subject matter here that draws me, so much as the self-reflexivity. Like Mitchell's point about meta-pictures, there is a tension within "The Grand Design" since the ideas that Bringhurst brings up are being (or have been) utilized in the printing of the text itself. I read how a typographer does (or should do) their job; I realize someone has done that job for this very text. (My brain says, "Ah, how clever!") ...So, have they done their job well?

In this instance, I'd say yes. It's a rather straightforward and simple discussion and listing of points - not something that needs flash and frills to prove a point. Wouldn't it be sadly ironic if the typographer arranged the text poorly and/or didn't "choose a typeface ... that will honor and elucidate the character of the text"? And even worse, if Bringhurst did it himself and did it poorly? But that's not the case, so that's really neither here nor there.

Harry Potter!What the reading led me to think about was typefaces/fonts and branding and how (or whether) they fit in with narrative or are themselves somewhat of a narrative. Looking at (what I imagine is) a familiar logo - the 'Harry Potter' typeface is certainly reflective of elements of the series (here, most obviously, evoking the lightning bolt shape of a certain character's scar). What happens when we write something else in the same font - or if we write 'Harry Potter' in bright pink bubble letters (perhaps with an exclamation point at the end)? Well hello, Tension.

Reese's/JesusA better example, perhaps, is taking a recognizable typeface or font and turning it into a religious / political / other potentially-controversial subject image or logo. Maybe I'm just trying to read too far into it, but is there real purpose, or a positive effect to be gained in this strange blending of (usually) consumerism and religious / political / other opinions? I get that it's an attempt at cleverness, but does it really say something valid? I don't think I personally gain anything from associating Jesus and Reese's, though I do appreciate puns (good or bad), so I'm not really complaining. I guess the tension here is from the fact that neither idea (the Son of God in the Christian faith; chocolate-covered peanut-butter-filled candy) really complements each other, in a sense of furthering either's own 'narrative'.

Though, I do think it is possible to create a complementary synthesis as such. The best example I can think of from my own experience: the trombone section of a marching band I used to be in used the Budweiser logo ('Budweiser: King of Beers') to make shirts that read 'Trombones: King of Brass'. The visual pun (of the Budweiser typeface) and the verbal similarities also worked with the affinity of trombone players for beer. I still don't know how they got away with that in high school.