From Voice ~ Topics: criticism, print design
Redesigning The New Yorker, Pt. 2: A Visual Critique
Would you redesign an institution like The New Yorker? Previously, KT Meaney argued for why the answer should be “yes.” Here, she presents a step-by-step, section-by-section visual critique of how she would do it:
1. The Table of Contents
The Table of Contents Forgets the Content
This crammed list needs more text, believe it or not.
Fig. A
From 1925 to 1969, The New Yorker had no Table of Contents, and some could argue today that it is still missing. Offered here on page six, sandwiched between two advertisements, is very little space to say much of anything. (Fig. A) What is said comes through the design: The New Yorker wants you to quickly recognize its authors, who have been given the most amount of space and typographic attention. Outside of that, content is difficult to locate. This stems from a poor visual hierarchy—limited typefaces, type sizes and line spacing. The choices made here create congestion. Outlining the magazine in its entirety is out of the question. Thus, Goings on About Town and The Talk of the Town have collapsed to a mere line or two (even though these sections are a third of this issue).
The last paragraph is a content-fitting apology: “Sorry, we have run out of room. So for this issue, Cover, Drawings and Spots [which are indeed three separate headings] are now together, in one awkwardly wide paragraph.” When there is ample space (special issues allot two pages to the ToC), that catch-all paragraph expands back to three, and aligns systematically to the center. A design slinky!
If the ToC were typeset differently—in two columns, not one, with enhanced typographic hierarchy—one could add all necessary content and improve clarity. This way, more text would feel less cramped. A furnished room looks bigger than an empty one. (Fig. B)
Add Another Column of Type
The new left column will play the role of “supporting actor.”
Fig. B
First, create more space by removing any ads from the contents page. Territorially speaking, we own that space! (However, I acknowledge the importance of advertisements, and, if they are necessary, simply extend the ToC across two pages.) Expand Goings on About Town and Talk of the Town. These sections are important to list. Combine Cover, Drawings and Spots into their own new category: Illustrations. List the endpage, too (in this issue, the Cartoon Caption Contest). This left paragraph is typeset slightly smaller and in gray to set it back. (Fig. B)
Enhance the Main Column
Change the type style, size, and leading.
The main column is highlighted: the column now sits in the middle of the page; the type is larger and darker. (Fig. B) Authors stand out in red for quick viewing. A new heading called Features is added, to keep consistent with the system. All headings are typeset in the New Yorker font Irvin. All subheads (now) are not. Instead, they are set in Caslon small caps. The variation allows for quick recognition. (Plus, Irvin doesn’t work perfectly well with Caslon italic, so we’ve tried to separate the two.) There are line breaks between essays, which create openness and ease of reading. These spaces are very important, and if left out result in typographic collisions. Essay titles are set large, in Caslon Ulc. Tag lines are in italic, and seem conversational (as if someone is explaining the essay). (Fig. C)
Fig. C, Fig. D, Fig. E
Type Punctilio
Attention to typographic detail.
Cut back on how often Irvin is used. Page numbers are now set with Caslon old style figures. Numbers are added next to artists, under drawings. This helps the reader locate their work. (Fig. D) When typesetting a title in quotations, hang your punctuation outside the margin. (Fig. E)
2. Goings on About Town
Goings on about the Grid
The current grid system is inflexible and redundant.
Fig. F
The New Yorker is set on a tight three-column grid, established by its first art editor, 82 years ago. (Fig. F) Seldom does the column break the margin to utilize mathematical variation. Virtually every page, no matter what part you’re reading (Goings On About Town, The Talk of the Town, The Critics, etc.), is based on this one-size-fits-all design. The problem: The New Yorker is a visually sectionless magazine with repetitive page design. The solution: let the content design itself. Lists, reviews and essays should dwell in different places. Column sizes would naturally vary, making each page distinctive and reflective of its own section.
The Callout Column
Narrow column needs to be wider.
Fig. G
Three-to-four-words per line makes for an awkward read. Let the first column extend into the second, if need be. Those grid lines are not prison bars. Break them. (Fig. G)
Headings and Subheads
Display type is hard to read and the color system, confusing.
Fig. H
Rethink the use of this Art Deco typeface for both headings and subheads. Having one part UC and the other Ulc would work better visually and systematically, making it clear which is a heading and which is a section. Hire a typographer to extend Rea Irvin’s base font to include lowercase too. Furthermore, the use of red is perplexing. It makes you think that “Studies in Amber” and “The Theatre” are hierarchically equivalent, which they are not. (Fig. H)
Hyphenation and Justification
Ditch the default settings to avoid multiple hyphenations.
Fig. I
Two hyphens in a row is a problem. Three is embarrassing (especially for an upper-crust literary magazine). All of this is avoidable. Set your InDesign file with typographic care. (Fig. I)
The Curse of Content-Fitting
The decision to justify most of the text likely comes from a need to fit as much content in as possible.
Fig. J
The schooled designer knows this is not a good excuse. Through placement, type-size variation and a flexible grid, one can design a page for both quality and quantity. In the end, a list can be a list (and, not, a, long, line, of, type, delineated, by, commas, or, dingbats). (Fig. J)
Typesetting Numbers
Find a font with depth.
These numbers act like capitals, standing while all other letters sit. (Fig. J) To visually level them, try using old style figures (as opposed to lining figures) while occurring in paragraph form. Old style figures share the same ventilation as lowercase. If the current font does not include OSF, pick one that does. There are so many full-bodied typefaces available that it’s not an acceptable argument to use short-sheeted typography. First, try Adobe Caslon!
3. The Talk of the Town
Word Count Fits the Layout
Less to talk about here.
Fig. K
The commentaries in this section are short (varying from 800 to 1200 words). Hence, the three-column system suits them well. Of course, we can always improve upon this format. (Fig. K) Here’s how:
Body Copy
Think of type size, leading and line-length in relationship.
Try to find the typesetting sweet spot. The point size/measure relationship can either offer unduly results or magical moments. The New Yorker seems to have an excess of broken words (hyphenation), tight letter spacing and widows/orphans. That means the point size is too big or the line length too narrow. If the page size is a given and three columns desired, the question remains: how do you set type within these constraints? For starters, take the point size down and notice the reflow.
4. Essays and The Critics
Fig. L
Poems
Lovely.
The ample space around the poems is a welcome breath amidst the crowd. The point size could be slightly smaller. The font could change altogether, for something surprising, but it is not necessary. (Fig. L)
Wimpy Drop Cap
Big drop caps are beautiful, but probably not “fitting” on a justified column 13 picas wide.
Fig. M, Fig. N, Fig. O
To accommodate them, The New Yorker drops its caps only two lines down, throughout an entire article. They look awkward. (Fig. M) Maybe this inelegance stems from their closeness to the title size. Your eye compares the 30-point Caslon to 26-point Irvin, and for once, you’re on Irvin’s side. (Fig. N) (Caslon doesn’t seem to offer optical sizes—different master designs based on specific type sizes—and the letter looks stocky compared with the text weight.) Or maybe this two-line drop cap works only if the opening cap is grand. Back in 1925, the initial drop cap was a whopping three lines tall (which sounds minor, but looks major). It was followed by a word in small caps, which visually glued the disjointed letters together. Alas, our New Yorker is no longer like that. (Fig. O) And here I am becoming a proponent of the past—but only when the past functions better than the present.
The High Price of a Low Budget Look
The magazine prints in four colors but predominantly uses only one: black.
Fig. P
The 2 x 2-inch advertisement in the margin is bursting with color, yet the whole spread is sedately black and white: an inedible garnish amidst this rice-and-beans meal. (Fig. P) If The New Yorker pays for CMYK, as the ad suggests, shouldn’t the spread sing with color? To make the most of money spent, let’s rethink color choices. Any one of the New Yorker sections could easily be differentiated with a subtle page tint. This would help one flip to desired articles. Illustrations could be colored, too. How devilish: Hell could look quite hot! (Fig. P)
The Margin
Where did it go?
The margin on bottom is smaller than on top. Hence, the layout looks bottom-heavy. Reverse order and ditch the last line, if necessary. We’ll find space elsewhere. (Our intention is not to make the magazine longer or more expensive, merely more functional.)
Running Footer
Change the font.
Try the Futura-like font from Goings on About Town. Loosen up the letter spacing. Tighten up space near the folio. Try setting the date with numbers. Most importantly, give it more room in the margin.
Block Quotes
There is no simple solution here.
Fig. Q
A smaller point size, and a tighter lead fits more words per line, yes, but the overall feel is ghostly—like the quote is not speaking but whispering. (Fig. Q) Plus, a tighter lead produces inconsistent spacing at the end of the quote. If we can agree that this looks bad, let’s then attempt to keep the block quote on the same baseline grid as the body copy. Take the point size down; then make it italic or bold or whatnot. If the column were wider, you could left-indent, too.
Image captions
Treat them differently
Fig. R
Image captions are 12 pt Caslon italic. Bylines look exactly the same. Given this visual link, I naturally want to call the artist Mr. Flying Rat. (Fig. R) My suggestion is to introduce a new font altogether, as done in Goings on About Town—one that contrasts to the body copy.
-
Very good article. Excellent suggestions. I think it's possible to improve, update and redesign without losing the New Yorker look or experience. Really liked your ideas. Why not do it?
Cordially,
Mike Sonnenfeld
Graphic Designer
American Planning Association -
Well done, i agree with many of the points you make as well.
I'm curious about your thoughts of the design of The New York Times magazine. and what other magazines do you prize for there design, that are comparable. -
Phew. I read your initial article and somehow, it seemed like you were going to chuck a couple of firebombs into the theater. I love the New Yorker, and I have since I was 16. (I'm only 22, so really...) After looking through your suggestions, I'm extremely pleased with almost all of them. Each suggestion seems almost obvious after-the-fact, but far less obvious to someone who's used to the New Yorker. I fully admit that I don't pay attention to or critique the visual details of the New Yorker everytime I look at it, which is much different than most mags I flip through.
The only point I have to disagree with here is the use of color. If the New Yorker is to use color, it should use it sparingly and judiciously. The visual beauty of the New Yorker is in its flatness, in its lack of flash and visual contrast. Words are what matter in the New Yorker, and to use color to highlight anything else (eg, illustrations — hell, I hate that ads are in color, but it's business) would detract from the words. Personally, I would err on the side of caution — in fact, I wouldn't even open that bag of tricks. -
Interesting, but I think this article could have been laid out better, itself!
-
The TOC works for me, I don't need too much information there. Plus they'll never give up that ad space.
The New Yorker is more of a newspaper than a magazine, and everybody knows, newspapers are suppposed to be ugly.
Changing column measures in the New Yorker is sacrilege. The three column makes it easy to read one-handed on the 6 train or crammed in an airplane seat.
I really can't agree with many of your suggestions, save for the magazine needing a better cut of Caslon.
--God. -
Good article. I'm glad I'm not the only one that finds the New Yorker difficult to read because of its layout and design. It really overshadows the content. There are lots of ways to update the design without abandoning tradition altogether.
-
Excellent! I subscribed to the New Yorker last year and noticed so many graphical errors and difficulties with their system. I think your ideas are simple, logical, and certainly acceptable to preserve an institution rather than destroy it.
-
check out walrusmagazine.com
The Walrus magazine is canada's New Yorker.
The design is much tighter... The New Yorker could learn a thing or two. -
great article. The New Yorker is obviously an amazing magazine but it could be easier on the eyes and all of your suggestions certainly could help. Tinting the pages or adding too much color might be a bit much though.
Overall I wish that they would make a move with the design though. Didn't Chip Kidd do something with the design of the New Yorker for one issue years ago? or was it just an attempt that never happened?
However I wish that we could click on the images to see your examples larger.
God, I don't think that magazines are supposed to look ugly, I find the NY Times or Wall Street Journal more designed and attractive then the New Yorker. -
Michael, my point was that the non-design of TNY serves to highlight the high quality of the text, photos and illustration. They clearly prioritize the text and visuals. Unfortunately, too many magazines with spotty content get by with design pyrotechnics.
The extemely tight (or boring) design allows the staff to publish a respectable weekly without sending pages back and forth between editors; tweaking layouts -- they'd never make their deadlines -- they flow the stories, set the 2-line drop caps and voila.
Perhaps I am being a bit reactionary. Okay, yes, they should learn InDesign H&Js, get a better Caslon, and figure out block quotes. -
No. I don't wish to sound intemperate, but this article is misguided, flat-footed and wrong. Here we go:
Inconsistencies, idiosyncracies, infelicities and even demonstrable inconveniences can be (and are in this case) rare and cherishable pleasures.
The proposal above is business as usual, predicated on a default-mode design philosophy: removing anomalies, straightening obscurantist flourishes and banishing general oddities is needed, isn't it? Isn't that what we do as designers? Optimize? So it necessarily follows: down with higgledy-piggledy accreted, volkische visual customs (how... rural... and how many we may find here...) and up with an argued-for, countersigned (read: bureaucratized, subdemocratic) justification for every hyphen, or lack thereof.
If only TNY were made just a smidgen more self-consistent, then meaning could flow more smoothly, more accessibly. Ever heard this argument before? I know I have.
And yet: would you redesign a Thelonious Monk solo for consistency?
Do all forms of obscurely derived, uniquely personalised and inbred, inconsistent expressions make us reach for our Macs? Crikey, I hope not. Let's hear it for bum notes and wonky handwriting instead.
A much better redesign paradigm is required, and the one in evidence here is to me in no sense mitigated by 'fussiness' and sensitivity (although both tendernesses are shown, I'm glad to say).
A smarter approach is one that welcomes inconsistency, infidelity and infelicity as textures, as pleasures, not as to-do's, or job opportunities.
The wonky and charming New Yorker visual style took over a lifetime to evolve, and will take only a few months well-reasoned, smartly-credentialled, sensitive, clever and well-intentioned work to bland up.
Hands off, please. -
God, the notion that non-design "serves to highlight the high quality of the text" is really cofusing me. By this logic, all any rag needs to do to imply high class standing is to come across as incompetent from a design standpoint. Clearly this is not the case. Those with a good product on their hands want their product to look good (and more importantly, read well) for a very solid reason: it matters.
On your second point, you're assuming that a boring design is fundamentally synonymous with a tight one. I can assure you that this is wrong. Unless you're assuming that the call here is for some bombastic alteration to the format... But I believe it's clear that the concern of this article is in subtlety. -
Lars, you have me even more perplexed. You seem to be reacting to some philosophical issues altogether separate from this article! Don't think for a second that there isn't bureaucracy currently at play in the New Yorker offices. As you're illustrating oh so well, people fight tooth and nail for those things that they're used to only because they're used to them, defiantly rejecting any bid at reason. Again, after my last comment, the notion that poor editorial design is somehow favorable is quite simply ludicrous.
It should be noted that this is not a Thelonius Monk solo we're considering here. It's a magazine. Understand that there are quite a few differences between the two.
And this argument that the "charming" design of the New Yorker is superior because it "evolved" is merely a poetic flourish. The New Yorker has clearly floundered through the years, not evolved. -
Yea, I think there is definitely room for improvement - given the level of content this magazine adheres to. It should also adhere it's design to these levels - seems like a no-brainer to me - ? I agree with the concept of knowing which section of the magazine I am in - often I simply get tired from reading the 3-5 word columns - I think there is a better layout - breaking of grid that might create some difference and create some pauses, and make it easier on the reader over all. The other typographical hierarchy issues seem obvious too - the color red, etc
I would LOVE to see a re-design/package, also to match the award wining illustration. -
The conservative approach to the design of the New Yorker would seem to be at odds with its content, which is often fresh, engaging, and often politically and socially liberal.
But is it really? The resignation of illustrator and cover artist Art Spiegleman from the magazine over what he saw as political self-censorship on the part of magazine was an interesting move and convinced me that the magazine could be taking a stronger stance on all fronts: more exposing reportage (like the Abu Ghraib story), more opinion expressed overtly on behalf of the staff and published by contributed authors, and more bold steps in design.
Here's hoping a fantastic magazine can and will continue to take truly evolutionary steps. -
@Matthew P, I hope you understand my comments in favour of doing *absolutely nothing at all* to TNY are indeed generalisable to other design briefs (if not, they'd they have no merit as argument) and that no, I'm not confusing a magazine with a piece of music.
Secondly, you object to my characterisation of TNY style as having 'evolved' (fair point, the word has Victorian overtones of steadily increasing perfections, which are certainly not found in this case) then perhaps the idea of 'wabi-sabi' is more palatable: TNY is nicely scuffed, no? Or is that also too "poetic," hence a discountable, non-concept?
Ok, one last try.
Charm is a design feature. (If we need the word 'charm' to be bureaucratised for the committee, let's call it, um... "irrationally positive user experience"). Contrary to all professional and theoretical expectations, we find typographic convolutions, clunky conventions and other design inconsistencies (up to and including amateurism and flat-out mistakes) are often the very things non-design-educated readers of TNY/Insert Your Own Findings Here would describe as charming, without perhaps knowing or caring why this is so.
You might think my do-nothing-now stance on this particular issue characterises me as merely some kind of design reactionary fighting for the past beyond/despite 'reason' as you put it. Thanks. I'm not anything of the sort, but this characterisation should be a help to anyone else needing to overlook the substance of my argument.
Lastly, floundering is entirely right, if you're referring to content now: the quality therein is highly erratic month-in, month-out.
Still, I live in hope and keep reading the damn thing. Long live TNY. -
Thanks for a great article. I agree with you on all points except the couloring part.
Fig. L seams to be missing.


Comments