Interesting one. . . from a display point of view, Excelsior sits quite comfortable amongst the Hebrew.

when reduced to body text to me Chapparel reduces well and holds its clarity, and would seem slightly more legible on the eye.

This always brings up an interesting dilemma for me.

Coming from a calligraphic background I continually think contrast. In this interlinear translation piece I sparred with myself for days. What works and what doesn’t work.

This piece of course is not a book so maybe? the same rules do not apply. But... I always want to see a sparkle engendered by the interplay of two styles.

Does my questioning myself help you?

Michael

Oh, and please don’t tell me I made a spelling mistake in the Hebrew. I would be devastated 16 years later to find it out.

Bringhusrt deals with duos very effectively. Check out his book, it may spur your thoughts.

Michael

If I remember rightly, Henri Friedlaender designed Hadassa partly under the influence of Jenson. At any rate, I think Adobe Jenson goes pretty well with it.

As you know, the biggest problem with almost any Hebrew with roman is that the stress is opposite—thick horzontal vs thin vertical, rather than the other way around. Mixing them on the same line, as your text (a list of names) seems to require, is the most difficult thing, and the contrast approach, which otherwise can be very good, may be hard to bring off in that situation.

So if you are going to use Hadassa, I would experiment with different sizes, weights and optical sizes of Adobe Jenson and see what harmonizes best. There are a whole lot of options with Adobe Jenson Pro Opticals, so you can probably find something that works reasonably well. I suspect you can find a combination that will work better than any of the fonts you’ve tried so far.

Here are a couple for you William. Who’s Hebrew font is this. What is the underlying complexity of this piece that alludes to the split in East versus West writing, and (bonus points) what is the name of the ductus (best word I can come up with)?

Michael

> Oh, and please don’t tell me I made a spelling mistake in the Hebrew

Yes :)

> If I remember rightly, Henri Friedlaender designed Hadassa partly under the influence of Jenson.

I’m not sure, but let me read his paper.again.
— The Making of Hadassah Hebrew (1967, written in German)

No way David... really???????? It took me months to find a New Testament Bible in Hebrew for the scripture of James. Finally a local Rabbi got me a copy of one and I matched letter for letter. Now I am devastated and will have to call my 86 year old friend and call him on it... for not pointing out my error(s)! I usually run these things by three people at least. Cannot remember on this one.

A self flogging is in order

Michael

Michael, you’ve got be stumped on all three.

On the Hebrew font, the square corner on the hey vs the round bet looks a little odd to me, but I’m sure David can give a more expert analysis. I’ll be daring and maybe make a fool of myself—not first time!—and guess that this font was not done by a Hebrew speaker.

Also for me, Latin, Hebrew and Arabic are all Western, so I’m not getting the West vs East thing.

The main thing that puzzles me about your piece is why the quote from the New Testament, which is originally in Greek, would be translated into both Hebrew and English. As neither is the original language, who is this for?

edit: I cross posted. Guf(body) is with a gimmel, not a nun. Also maybe the Dalet should be a hey, so it would then read “haguf” (the body). Right David?

First off... leave it to a Gentile calligrapher to make a typo! :)

If I am not mistaken it was one of Ismar David’s faces. Phenomenal artist who made his way to NY via Germany and Israel. His sculpture is above reproach. Time dulls historical memories but google him.

The writing direction started to shift “back and forth” early on but was solidified in the sixth century B.C. Before that the writing, and, yes you are correct by the Greeks, was written boustrophedonically, as the oxen plows, literally reversing the non symmetric letters to suit the direction. Hence the multidirectional ethos of this piece. Subtle is always a plus in a design. I like the fact that most would not pick up on it.

As to Hebrew ... just a choice that would make my design point (and a bow to my father who was an Old Testament scholar)... Greek would not have worked. And english, well I grew up with the King James. Last time I looked, English was/is my first language... es la verdad!

Michael

> so it would then read “haguf”

Right Bill. Also about the bet (the square corner on the hey vs the round bet).
Around the 1930s & 1950s Isamr David developed a family of book, sans & cursive. Your sample is the sans, of course; far away from his original. Michael, this is your work (revival)?

Michael, I revised it a couple of times to be more concise.

I at first discussed alternating lines (or pages) and your solution of contrast, which can work nicely, as in your example. But then I read the Hebrew of the first post and realized it was just a list of names, with the names also in roman. So it couldn’t work with the alternate line—or page—approach. The roman and Hebrew had to be mixed in the same line.

When I realized