> > I'm not understanding what's meant by ``whiteletter''
and hrant replied:
> Blame Gary. :-)
> It's basically the Italian stuff that
> replaced the once-standard blackletter.
Okay, got it.
I don't see how whiteletter in this context is especially / overtly
``feminine''---not as overtly masculine as blackletter, maybe, more
potentially neutral possibly... Blackletter as masculine? That works a
bit better, since it's from a timeframe where overwhelmingly literacy /
writing was a masculine thing (but not completely, Hildegard of Bingen
and all that)---trying to think of examples of blackletter calligraphy
by women.... Doesn't Sheila what's-her-name, the one who did (is doing?)
the ``Foundations of Calligraphy'' series in _Letter Arts Review_ do a
lot of her work in that style?
> As for "gestures", a raised fist is a "sign" of physical
> violence (and culture is very unlikely to brainwash that out).
> So any graphic device that happens to connote a raised fist will
> inevitably be associated with violence - not entirely (since
> culture can associate other things with it too), but in part.
This is culture-specific---waving with one's open hand toward the other
is insulting in some cultures, etc. A google search on ``raised fist
symbolism'' is interesting (although obscured somewhat by misspellings
> It's crazy to claim that Culture is irrelevant in bahavior,
> and especially in communication. What I'm saying is that we're
> not theoretical beings in some conceptual ether: we're animals,
> flesh and blood, and that's the *foundation* of everything in
> our lives, including communication. The foundation gets partly
> obscured through culture, but it is there, and is no less
> relevant than culture - in fact more so.
I'm not seeing any convincing indication that any of the sort of
behaviour / cognition / reaction we're discussing is at this
> There is a tendency which has grown strong in the last few decades
> to attribute *everything* to cultural training. To me that amounts
> to psychological cowardice; it's wrong, and among other things it
> reduced the quality of our work.
I don't see the former trend beyond what logic / experience indicates. I
don't see rational thought/observation as ``cowardice''
> Sober analysis about our "low-level realities" is warranted.
Right---but I don't see much of that in this thread. Not trying to be
insulting / confrontational, merely commenting on what I've
observed---if I've missed something, or mis-interpreted something, or
failed to comprehend a point, please bring it up again.
William Adams, publishing specialist
ATLIS Graphics & Design / 717-731-6707 voice / 717-731-6708 fax
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.