alt Hacker NewsThe article makes clear that the orientation of the lettering has changed over time, which counts against the idea that what it is now necessarily reflects the original intent.
The article makes clear that the orientation of the lettering has changed over time, which counts against the idea that what it is now necessarily reflects the original intent.
Fair enough.
To me the evidence in the article still suggests that “hard correctness” is probably not historically appropriate…hand lettering is not a typeface.
That’s really where I am coming from — the perspective of historical architecture, historical architectural practice, and historical methods of delivering buildings.
In particular, today’s mythological Wright is not the 1908’s historical Wright on a commercial jobsite. And the contractual relationships of a 1908 construction project were not delineated like current construction projects.