klim.co.nz
Open in
urlscan Pro
18.155.68.40
Public Scan
URL:
https://klim.co.nz/retail-fonts/national/
Submission: On August 21 via manual from CH — Scanned from NZ
Submission: On August 21 via manual from CH — Scanned from NZ
Form analysis 1 forms found in the DOM
<form>
<div class="SubscribeForm__Inner-sc-160g7ul-0 oVLQU">
<div class="SubscribeForm__Fields-sc-160g7ul-1 fzZODc">
<div data-cy="fieldContainer" class="FieldInputGroup__Container-sc-7e7n1h-0 kiGYMu">
<div>
<div class="FieldText__Container-sc-ml1whw-0 lbRNgq"><label for="448b98bf-5519-4794-8472-c8d3078e9907" class="FieldText__Label-sc-ml1whw-2 fcnmyq">Email address</label><input id="448b98bf-5519-4794-8472-c8d3078e9907" type="text"
placeholder="Email address" name="email" class="FieldText__Input-sc-ml1whw-1 ibnFqQ"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div><button type="submit" class="Button-sc-7edkpn-0 Button__InlineButton-sc-7edkpn-1 ijrjxC UPbRN">Subscribe</button></div>
</div>
</div>
</form>Text Content
Skip to content Klim Type Foundry Fonts Menu Account Cart National ◑ Styles ▲ Styles Specimens Glyphs In use Information Test ⤓ Buy National Family 18 STYLES Thin100Thin Italic100Light200Light Italic200Book300Book Italic300Regular400Regular Italic400Medium500Medium Italic500Semibold600Semibold Italic600Bold700Bold Italic700Extrabold800Extrabold Italic800Black900Black Italic900 SPECIMENS 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicThin -0.010 From $60 Graham Island 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicLight -0.010 From $60 Mount Barrett 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBook -0.010 From $60 Renown Rock 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicRegular -0.010 From $60 Tokata Island 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium -0.010 From $60 Whataru Bay 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicSemibold -0.010 From $60 Banded Bluff 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBold -0.010 From $60 Hawea Rock 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicExtrabold -0.010 From $60 Manuka Flat 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBlack -0.010 From $60 Bishops Bay 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicThin Italic -0.010 From $60 Waikutu Creek 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicLight Italic -0.010 From $60 Crooked River 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBook Italic -0.010 From $60 Healeys Gully 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicRegular Italic -0.010 From $60 Wallace Inlet 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium Italic -0.010 From $60 Broom Brook 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicSemibold Italic -0.010 From $60 Hesper Gully 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBold Italic -0.010 From $60 The Landing 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicExtrabold Italic -0.010 From $60 Saxton Pass 282px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBlack Italic -0.010 From $60 Mount Scott 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicThin 0.000 From $60 O body swayed to music, O brightening glance, how can we know the dancer from the dance? 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicLight 0.000 From $60 The thing about preservation is that, by definition, it doesn’t leave things alone. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBook 0.000 From $60 But in the global era, images have taken over as the possessors of revolutionary force. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicRegular 0.000 From $60 Legibility, in practice, amounts simply to what one is accustomed to. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium 0.000 From $60 The copying process was error-free, and the time it took insignificant. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicSemibold 0.000 From $60 Working with historical typologies to keep them alive and fresh seems to me a worthwhile occupation. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBold 0.000 From $60 As in other fields, the main thing traded here is the derivatives. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicExtrabold 0.000 From $60 It is possible to use a letterform as raw material for creating another form. 97px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBlack 0.000 From $60 As a listener, you’re happy with quite a lot less. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicLight, Light Italic 0.000 From $60 History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely utilitarian literature — indispensable technical manuals, and the like — that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050. It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily. In the same way, the associations called up by a word like Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable. In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgement should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets. His training fitted him to do this, the language gave him an almost foolproof instrument, and the texture of the words, with their harsh sound and a certain wilful ugliness which was in accord with the spirit of Ingsoc, assisted the process still further. So did the fact of having very few words to choose from. Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised. Newspeak, indeed, differed from most all other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning ‘to quack like a duck’. Like various other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment. The C vocabulary was supplementary to the others and consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms. These resembled the scientific terms in use today, and were constructed from the same roots, but the usual care was taken to define them rigidly and strip them of undesirable meanings. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBook, Book Italic 0.000 From $60 Newspeak, indeed, differed from most all other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning ‘to quack like a duck’. Like various other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment. The C vocabulary was supplementary to the others and consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms. These resembled the scientific terms in use today, and were constructed from the same roots, but the usual care was taken to define them rigidly and strip them of undesirable meanings. They followed the same grammatical rules as the words in the other two vocabularies. Very few of the C words had any currency either in everyday speech or in political speech. Any scientific worker or technician could find all the words he needed in the list devoted to his own speciality, but he seldom had more than a smattering of the words occurring in the other lists. Only a very few words were common to all lists, and there was no vocabulary expressing the function of Science as a habit of mind, or a method of thought, irrespective of its particular branches. There was, indeed, no word for ‘Science’, any meaning that it could possibly bear being already sufficiently covered by the word Ingsoc. From the foregoing account it will be seen that in Newspeak the expression of unorthodox opinions, above a very low level, was well-nigh impossible. It was of course possible to utter heresies of a very crude kind, a species of blasphemy. It would have been possible, for example, to say Big Brother is ungood. But this statement, which to an orthodox ear merely conveyed a self-evident absurdity, could not have been sustained by reasoned argument, because the necessary words were not available. Ideas inimical to Ingsoc could only be entertained in a vague wordless form, and could only be named in very broad terms which lumped together and condemned whole groups of heresies without defining them in doing so. One could, in fact, only use Newspeak for unorthodox purposes by illegitimately translating some of the words back into Oldspeak. For example, All mans are equal was a possible Newspeak sentence, but only in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth — i.e. that all men are of equal size, weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary meaning of ‘politically equal’, or that free had once meant ‘intellectually free’, than for instance, a person who had never heard of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more and more pronounced — its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses always diminishing. When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicRegular, Regular Italic 0.000 From $60 One could, in fact, only use Newspeak for unorthodox purposes by illegitimately translating some of the words back into Oldspeak. For example, All mans are equal was a possible Newspeak sentence, but only in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth — i.e. that all men are of equal size, weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary meaning of ‘politically equal’, or that free had once meant ‘intellectually free’, than for instance, a person who had never heard of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more and more pronounced — its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses always diminishing. When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely utilitarian literature — indispensable technical manuals, and the like — that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050. It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily. In the same way, the associations called up by a word like Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable. In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium, Medium Italic 0.000 From $60 When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely utilitarian literature — indispensable technical manuals, and the like — that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050. It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily. In the same way, the associations called up by a word like Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable. In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgement should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets. His training fitted him to do this, the language gave him an almost foolproof instrument, and the texture of the words, with their harsh sound and a certain wilful ugliness which was in accord with the spirit of Ingsoc, assisted the process still further. So did the fact of having very few words to choose from. Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised. Newspeak, indeed, differed from most all other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning ‘to quack like a duck’. Like various other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment. The C vocabulary was supplementary to the others and consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms. These resembled the scientific terms in use today, and were constructed from the same roots, but the usual care was taken to define them rigidly and strip them of undesirable meanings. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicSemibold, Semibold Italic 0.000 From $60 It did not contain a grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth — i.e. that all men are of equal size, weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary meaning of ‘politically equal’, or that free had once meant ‘intellectually free’, than for instance, a person who had never heard of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more and more pronounced — its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses always diminishing. When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely utilitarian literature — indispensable technical manuals, and the like — that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050. It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily. In the same way, the associations called up by a word like Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable. In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgement should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicBold, Bold Italic 0.000 From $60 They followed the same grammatical rules as the words in the other two vocabularies. Very few of the C words had any currency either in everyday speech or in political speech. Any scientific worker or technician could find all the words he needed in the list devoted to his own speciality, but he seldom had more than a smattering of the words occurring in the other lists. Only a very few words were common to all lists, and there was no vocabulary expressing the function of Science as a habit of mind, or a method of thought, irrespective of its particular branches. There was, indeed, no word for ‘Science’, any meaning that it could possibly bear being already sufficiently covered by the word Ingsoc. From the foregoing account it will be seen that in Newspeak the expression of unorthodox opinions, above a very low level, was well-nigh impossible. It was of course possible to utter heresies of a very crude kind, a species of blasphemy. It would have been possible, for example, to say Big Brother is ungood. But this statement, which to an orthodox ear merely conveyed a self-evident absurdity, could not have been sustained by reasoned argument, because the necessary words were not available. Ideas inimical to Ingsoc could only be entertained in a vague wordless form, and could only be named in very broad terms which lumped together and condemned whole groups of heresies without defining them in doing so. One could, in fact, only use Newspeak for unorthodox purposes by illegitimately translating some of the words back into Oldspeak. For example, All mans are equal was a possible Newspeak sentence, but only in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth — i.e. that all men are of equal size, weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary meaning of ‘politically equal’, or that free had once meant ‘intellectually free’, than for instance, a person who had never heard of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more and more pronounced — its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses always diminishing. When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox (goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could be translated as a whole. Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation — that is, alteration in sense as well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government… It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric on absolute government. A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron, Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation: when the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely utilitarian literature — indispensable technical manuals, and the like — that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050. It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily. 22px ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicExtrabold, Extrabold Italic 0.000 From $60 In the same way, the associations called up by a word like Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable. In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgement should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets. His training fitted him to do this, the language gave him an almost foolproof instrument, and the texture of the words, with their harsh sound and a certain wilful ugliness which was in accord with the spirit of Ingsoc, assisted the process still further. So did the fact of having very few words to choose from. Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised. Newspeak, indeed, differed from most all other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning ‘to quack like a duck’. Like various other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment. The C vocabulary was supplementary to the others and consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms. These resembled the scientific terms in use today, and were constructed from the same roots, but the usual care was taken to define them rigidly and strip them of undesirable meanings. They followed the same grammatical rules as the words in the other two vocabularies. Very few of the C words had any currency either in everyday speech or in political speech. Any scientific worker or technician could find all the words he needed in the list devoted to his own speciality, but he seldom had more than a smattering of the words occurring in the other lists. Only a very few words were common to all lists, and there was no vocabulary expressing the function of Science as a habit of mind, or a method of thought, irrespective of its particular branches. There was, indeed, no word for ‘Science’, any meaning that it could possibly bear being already sufficiently covered by the word Ingsoc. From the foregoing account it will be seen that in Newspeak the expression of unorthodox opinions, above a very low level, was well-nigh impossible. It was of course possible to utter heresies of a very crude kind, a species of blasphemy. It would have been possible, for example, to say Big Brother is ungood. But this statement, which to an orthodox ear merely conveyed a self-evident absurdity, could not have been sustained by reasoned argument, because the necessary words were not available. Ideas inimical to Ingsoc could only be entertained in a vague wordless form, and could only be named in very broad terms which lumped together and condemned whole groups of heresies without defining them in doing so. One could, in fact, only use Newspeak for unorthodox purposes by illegitimately translating some of the words back into Oldspeak. For example, All mans are equal was a possible Newspeak sentence, but only in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth — i.e. that all men are of equal size, weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary meaning of ‘politically equal’, or that free had once meant ‘intellectually free’, than for instance, a person who had never heard of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more and more pronounced — its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses always diminishing. When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten, but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there, imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments, even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and untranslatable. GLYPHS Solid Bézier ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium▼ U+004E ‘N’ Ascender 668 Cap height 589 X-height 462 Baseline 0 Descender -203 Solid Bézier ThinThin ItalicLightLight ItalicBookBook ItalicRegularRegular ItalicMediumMedium ItalicSemiboldSemibold ItalicBoldBold ItalicExtraboldExtrabold ItalicBlackBlack ItalicMedium▼ U+004E ‘N’ UPPERCASE UPPERCASE ALTERNATES LOWERCASE LOWERCASE ALTERNATES SMALL CAPITALS SMALL CAPITAL ALTERNATES UPPERCASE ACCENTS UPPERCASE ACCENT ALTERNATES LOWERCASE ACCENTS LOWERCASE ACCENT ALTERNATES SMALL CAPITAL ACCENTS SMALL CAPITAL ACCENT ALTERNATES NUMERALS NUMERAL ALTERNATES LINING NUMERALS LINING NUMERAL ALTERNATES OLD-STYLE NUMERALS OLD-STYLE NUMERAL ALTERNATES TABULAR LINING NUMERALS TABULAR LINING NUMERAL ALTERNATES TABULAR OLD-STYLE NUMERALS TABULAR OLD-STYLE NUMERAL ALTERNATES CURRENCY & MATH LINING CURRENCY & MATH SUPERSCRIPT SUBSCRIPT ORDINALS ORDINAL ALTERNATES LIGATURES PUNCTUATION & SYMBOLS PUNCTUATION & SYMBOL CAPITAL FORMS PUNCTUATION & SYMBOL SMALL CAPITALS PREBUILT FRACTIONS ARROWS SHAPES IN USE DanceHouse National ILIT 100 National Clay National Make Nice National Enquête sur l’emploi et les salaires du design interactif National Kintsugi National More National in use INFORMATION National is a deceptively simple sans serif with subtle details that give it a distinctive — but not distracting — personality. It was drawn as a stylistic opposite to Helvetica with looser spacing, unambiguous forms, old-style figures and a “true” italic. The general functional aim is a typeface suitable for long-form reading at small sizes, something classically “typographic”. National’s details are drawn from the era of Akzidenz Grotesk, giving it a humble, workmanlike character with an agreeable tone of voice. While National travels through, and touches on, a lot of historical material, it is designed to thrive in our modern typographic climate. Family 18 Styles Release 2007 CREDITS & DETAILS+ Release2007 DesignKris Sowersby EngineeringNoe Blanco Chester Jenkins ClassificationModern: Lineal/Grotesque AwardsTDC² Award for Typographic Excellence, Judge’s Choice, 2008 SUPPORTED LANGUAGES+ WEB FONT FILE SIZES+ .woff2National Thin55kbNational Thin Italic59kbNational Light67kbNational Light Italic71kbNational Book60kbNational Book Italic56kbNational Regular68kbNational Regular Italic69kbNational Medium62kbNational Medium Italic65kbNational Semibold67kbNational Semibold Italic69kbNational Bold69kbNational Bold Italic54kbNational Extrabold67kbNational Extrabold Italic68kbNational Black66kbNational Black Italic57kb 1150kb Download test fonts⤓ Get news about our fonts Email address Subscribe Fonts * Calibre * Domaine * Domaine Sans * Epicene * Family * Feijoa * Financier * Founders Grotesk * Geograph * Heldane * Karbon * Maelstrom * Mānuka * Martina Plantijn * Metric * National * National 2 * Newzald * Pitch * Signifier * Söhne * The Future * Tiempos * Untitled Download test fonts ⤓ Custom fonts * Bula * Darling * Hokotohu * Metric FC * PayPal Sans * Pure Pākati * Serrano * Sovereign Coin * Story Sans * Wahoo Information * About * Blog * Interviews * Awards * Fonts in use * Account Support * Contact * FAQs * Font licences * Payments & refunds * Privacy policy Back to top ↑ Copyright © 2005 – 2023. All rights reserved. ⭍ Site build 21 August 2023 at 9:46am TmTwVmFkIgPn Close Account Cart Fonts Fonts in use Custom fonts Test fonts ⤓ Cart Account Blog Goods ⇗ About Interviews Awards Contact FAQs Font licences Payments & refunds Privacy policy TmTwVmFkIgPn Cart USDClose Your cart is empty. What about Karbon? It’s an open, geometric sans serif with a contemporary spartan finish.