Type and Nation, 3

This has faded from the NPR site, so here it is for posterity. From NPR: Talk of the Nation, July 3, 2003:

LYNN NEARY, host: When most Americans think of the paper version of the Declaration of Independence, they think of the document kept by the National Archives written in calligraphy and signed by the Founding Fathers. It’s faded and fragile, and for some people not as symbolic of democratic principles as other lesser known works. Here to talk about that is Thomas Starr. He’s a professor of graphic design at Northeastern University. We reached him at his home in Boston.

Thanks for being with us, Professor Starr.

Professor THOMAS STARR (Northeastern University): Thank you, Lynn.

NEARY: All right. Now, Professor Starr, most Americans are familiar with the calligraphy version of the Declaration of Independence, but tell us about the documents that predate it.

Prof. STARR: Well, we really have to start on July 2nd. That was the day that Congress voted in favor of independence, after which it took up editing the Declaration text. That editing took some time. It took two days, and it was quite heavy. Congress deleted about one-third of it and made 39 changes in addition. So on July 4th, when that manuscript was finished, in its form it was taken not to a calligrapher but to a typographer. And that typographer was John Dunlop. He was Congress’ official printer. And I would say he had the most important overnight printing job in history. He set the text in type, so he assembled it for the first time in its complete form, and ran his presses overnight, delivering to Congress on the 5th. So these were then delivered to the 13 colonies, where they were republished and disseminated further. These were the prints that the colonists saw. So the published Dunlop prints are really what did the declaring. And when you think of July Fourth, I mean, it’s a holiday in which the date is emphasized more than any other. And so what it actually celebrates is this day of typesetting and printing.

NEARY: When did the calligraphy document then come along?

Prof. STARR: Well, the calligraphy didn’t actually get ordered by Congress until July 19th. And what’s interesting is by then we know that the Dunlop Declarations had spread so far that they had been republished in 24 newspapers from Maryland to New Hampshire. And, you know, in 1776 Congress still traditionally formed its most important documents in calligraphy. It was a tradition left over from monarchy. But it had to use typography to communicate with the people. Typography really is the medium of democracy. So the calligraphic version now in the National Archives was finished only on August 2nd, so it really can’t be the version we’re commemorating when we think of the Fourth. And the type, for many reasons, is a more democratic version of the Declaration.

NEARY: But — now let’s go back to that idea of the Dunlop prints as being more representative of democracy because, of course, the calligraphy version of the Declaration of Independence has become so symbolic to us of the whole idea of the Revolution and democracy.

Prof. STARR: That’s right. Unfortunately, I think it symbolizes the wrong thing. Calligraphy is hard to read. It’s basically a kind of glorified handwriting. It basically repeats the hand of the author in creating a single somewhat idiosyncratic-looking document. Typography, on the other hand, is a medium of mass communication, and it standardizes letter forms, letters of the alphabet, for the advantage of the reader so that the reader can expect to see those forms repeatedly. So typography is really reader-oriented. Calligraphy also implies a singular author and reader when, in fact, you know, the text was a product of the Congress and it needed to be read by many people rather quickly. Typography implies multiple authors and readers, so those reading calligraphy know they’re the only ones that can be reading it at that particular time because it only produces one original. Whereas typography exists to mass-produce documents. So when you’re reading type, you can imagine other people reading that identical text, identical in every way, at the same time.

Furthermore, you mentioned that calligraphy is in the National Archives. It’s faded. Well, that’s right. It’s precious. It’s faded. It’s vulnerable to being lost or destroyed. But typography is so ubiquitous it’s hard to destroy. I mean, already we think that Dunlop printed 200 copies. Twenty-five exist to this day. But through typography they’ve been, you know, republished so many times it would be pretty hard to destroy that text in typography. So calligraphy really is, you know, basically and inherently elite, whereas typography is inherently democratic.

NEARY: Yeah. Now was there any difference between the two documents at all?

Prof. STARR: Well, yes. There are two major differences. The text is identical, but the July Fourth type has a title which says, `A Declaration,’ whereas in August the calligraphy says, `The Unanimous Declaration.’ And this speaks to the reason why there are these two documents, because in the vote of July 2nd, New York had to abstain from voting, so it couldn’t be unanimous. The representatives had outdated instructions from home to hold out for reconciliation with Britain. It wasn’t until July 9th that they could vote in favor, at which point Congress was able to authorize the revised title for the calligraphy.

The other change, which I think is really interesting, is that in type — oh, pardon me, in the calligraphy it’s autographed by John Hancock and the other members of Congress. That’s, I think, one of the things that makes it so compelling.

NEARY: Thanks so much.

Prof. STARR: But the type is signed in type by Hancock, then underneath his name are the words, ‘printed by John Dunlop.’

NEARY: OK. Thank you so much, Professor Starr.

Prof. STARR: Thank you.

NEARY: Thomas Starr is a professor of graphic design at Northeastern University in Boston.

And you’re listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.