(sans) serif

i have often wondered why, in the united states, the government depends so heavily on the use of serif typography. all of the lettering has little 'feet', as if to lend gravity and depth to the meaning of the words - without this grounding the text may in fact render itself superfluous. it seems that this is in manner a holdover from the earliest days of our country reaching it's birth - the gentlemanly script of days gone by. we have somehow not matured enough to distinguish between this link to the past, this imagery, and what we strive to be. campaign posters use the serif fonts; the large political screens staring blankly at us behind our 'leaders' use serif fonts - and certainly the good old greenback adopts this look for perpetuity. can we really be a superpower with sans serif graphics?

positive, forward thinking graphics is a reflection of what a country's mindset is. there is a certain 'democracy' in the sans serif font - it is seemingly devoid of pretension - the letters are just presenting themselves as what they are, without excess baggage. in europe we see the serif raise it's lovely head constantly - in fact, the confidence with which it is employed conveys a much more powerful message than the united states' grasp at merit by linking graphics with the past (think of steven colbert's eagle graphics poking fun at all of this).

lighten up america. literally (no pun intended).

h