How can cultural cringe be countered?

Warung banners portray a large facet of Indonesia’s common informal. They are characterized by large headings, all-caps text, stretched or distorted typefaces, effects, and gradients which, from a Western graphic design perspective, can give the impression of aggressive shouting. They are therefore often overlooked or undervalued under more common views associated with the International or Swiss style and minimalism. However, their designs do have their importance in local culture, as exemplified by the iconic Lamongan Pecel Lele warung banners, serving as a vibrant symbol of the regional identity and street food culture of East Java. They are characterized by illustrations and paintings of animals, neon borders, and text with warm gradients.

This Western critical eye relates to A.A. Philip’s theory of cultural cringe, which Filipino cultural worker Clara Balaguer defines as the phenomenon “by which the culture produced in an ex-colonial or colonial country is seen as inferior to that being produced in the colonial seat.” This is furthermore accentuated by Novreica: “the opulence of these Indonesian-styled graphics is sometimes overlooked, forgotten, and even underestimated because of the assumptions of them being low-brow or kitschy.”

How can cultural cringe be countered? How can these colonial traps be avoided? The focus of study should be shifted towards prioritizing local cultures rather than the study of Western concepts first. How can Western design be re-questioned? How can one step out of the Western design canon? Should a new canon be built?

Novreica emphasizes that “Indonesian ephemeras deserve to be used as a primary source for further research, which offers unique windows into cultures past.” By digging deeper into Indonesian ephemera and artifacts, we can uncover the stories and designs that make Indonesian culture unique.

Typography is now very mainly manipulated digitally and used as a program. Most of its common uses are through digital tools or mediums on screens. There is the birth of a user, the program is therefore adapted and conceived according to that user. Present dominant design software was primarily made to find solutions to Western problems, making foreign visual cultures adapt to fit the complications of these mediums. In these software, there is a real push for practicality and efficiency specifically intended for the conformity of Western uses and the Latin script, placing complex local scripts in tricky situations of use.

“Software developers often find it cumbersome to support different scripts. For example, Adobe’s InDesign has recently introduced support for some Southeast Asian scripts, but the user needs to find a hidden setting to display text correctly, and cannot access font features linked to particular languages.” The use of local scripts is sometimes therefore “susceptible to highly unattractive typographic representation, as some users are using the QWERTY keyboard to type out scripts like Balinese, often leading to strings of gibberish characters.” The adaptation of software for local minorities is often neglected, yet those decisions have impacts on how their languages and culture develop over time.

As Western technological developments are the ones leading the march for the implementation of local scripts, they hold a certain position of power. Are Western software therefore dictating the development of local scripts? With the importation of Unicode, local scripts are subjected to a new form of writing system that is developed around movable type and the Latin script. In addition to that, they are trapped in a new language standardization with a Unicode consortium that stays impartial. Is Unicode therefore always respecting local ethics and customs? Can encoding script be non-standardized and inclusive? Can a universal encoding be applied without discrediting local customs?

We could think of QUNI by the collective Bye Bye Binary, for example, which is a first approach towards a more inclusive encoding. “QUNI allows us to bring together our fonts, with all the diversity they contain, around the same encoding system for their use by a wide audience.”

However, concerning its effects on local cultures: does digitalization really lead to language preservation? Can a new digital space emerge to face these challenges? As stated by Aditya Bayu Perdana, “digitalization should be hand in hand with the people’s willingness to use it in mundane everyday manner. Some scripts are not to be used digitally as their everyday common use is outside of the digital space.”

The process of creating a modern typeface in the digital sphere often prioritizes efficiency over materiality, leading to the loss of the script’s original written characteristics. As modifications are made, imperfections are gradually erased, and the medium on which the letters were initially engraved or brushed becomes less prominent in its design. Is this loss of materiality a necessary sacrifice for the sake of efficiency and modernity? The Balinese script Aksara Bali is heavily linked to its role in religious manuscripts, sacred in the forms of lontar made out of palm leaf strips and inked with burnt candlenut. If the main use of the script today is in a palm-leaf manuscript, what would happen if that materiality is lost? Shouldn’t the script’s imperfections be respected as an integral part of its identity?

Under colonial rule, the Javanese script, a sister script of Aksara Bali, was altered to accommodate movable type and letterpress printing. Are we witnessing a similar phenomenon in the digital era, where the materiality of non-Latin scripts is being eroded?

In this search for perfect typography, do these modern approaches share the vision of locals? Views of modernity in South East Asia, for example, are quite distinct from Western visions, sometimes viewed quite negatively. “In Myanmar/Burmese, other more idiosyncratic terms for the modern have also appeared, related not to time but rather to an ill-at-ease mental state: a phenomenon which seems not to have been replicated in the other languages under discussion.”

However, there is a resurgence of materiality with the arrival of hand-brushed and handwritten stylized typography in the Indonesian common informal. “Some years ago, probably circa 2010-2018, lettering was booming in Indonesia, thanks to Instagram and other similar platforms. More people tried hand lettering, calligraphy, etc.” However, are these typefaces just a quick or efficient digital alternative to sign paintings? Are they benefiting local traditions and local customs?

For the development of multi-script typefaces, the Latin script is often the primary reference, sometimes leading to forms of Latinization. When Latin shapes are incorporated into other scripts, regardless of whether they conform to the script’s initial conventions, this can result in a disregard for the script’s unique characteristics and local identity.

How can type design processes be less dependent on Latin script developments? Can script development break free from Latin script dominance? Despite some efforts to revitalize a script respectfully, most current type design processes remain centered on the notions and developments of the Latin script, with less attention paid to the specific needs and requirements of distinct scripts. Current typographic endeavors for multi-script typefaces start with the objective of harmonization, “yet the problem arising is assimilation.” There is a certain push for unifying scripts to be legible in the same exact way, with a typeface that matches from script to script.

Where do we draw the line between processes of Latinization and independent development? At what point do we prioritize preserving the unique characteristics of non-Latin scripts over the pursuit of uniformity and legibility in multi-script typefaces? To adhere to Western markets, some once exclusively Latin concepts have been applied to local scripts completely foreign from that, such as weights and thick-and-thin contrasts. In efforts to unify a wide range of scripts for Google Fonts Noto Sans, thick-and-thin contrasts have been named with the concepts of serif and sans serif, completely irrelevant to local scripts like Balinese, Javanese, or Lontara.

Is Latinization a new form of language standardization? Are local scripts benefiting from being Latinized, or is it exclusively empowering the Latin script?

The widespread use of Western typefaces in Indonesian common informal graphic design raises important concerns about cultural representation and the development of local design identities. Western typefaces have been popularized globally, spreading a design vision that can be inconsiderate of local customs.

There is a prevalence of American typefaces, such as Helvetica, which has become quite ubiquitous. “Now it’s probably never going to go away because it’s ubiquitous; it’s a default. It’s air, you know, it’s just there. There’s no choice.” Clearview Highway and Highway Gothic, the chosen typefaces for the national traffic signage of Indonesia, were initially conceptualized for traffic signage in the United States. Cooper Black, Impact, Egyptienne, Balloon, and other common Western typefaces found on warung stands illustrate the significant Western influence on Indonesian visual culture. Davida is used out of a Victorian context for its decorative features.

These typefaces were mainly conceptualized for Western environments, making them not entirely suitable for such global outreach. This possibly leads to a lack of consideration for the specific linguistic and cultural needs of Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia. Can typefaces and conventions be suitable globally without disrespecting local customs? Shouldn’t the appropriateness of these Western typefaces be questioned before being accepted as the default choice for all situations? Does the dominant presence of Western typefaces change the way locals interact with letters and their unique alphabets?

With this massive dominance of Western typefaces, are new local typefaces and scripts able to develop their own distinctive identity? Very little room is given for Indonesian type design to be explored. Cultural identity with the use of Latin script is also suppressed and placed in a concerning position for its development. Where is the presence of Indonesian typography amidst this dominance? Is Indonesian type design given enough space to develop its own identity?

On a global level, design criteria cannot be simply generalized without considering the unique cultural contexts and local identities that shape them. Should design principles really be adapted globally? Isn’t their intent for neutrality erasing local cultural identities and associated languages?

The International or Swiss style is often taught at school globally and is often a first reference to graphic design. Academically it often dictates what is good or bad design. Should there really be design principles for defining what is good or bad design? How can non-Western-centric conventions adapt to these dominant design principles? How do local identities evolve under restrictive Western conventions? These Western-imposed conventions come at the expense of local visual cultures and cultural diversity, where expressiveness is toned down and nurtured.

However, as stated by Peter Bilak, “The alphabet is by its very nature dependent on and defined by conventions. Type design that is not bound by convention is like a private language: both lack the ability to communicate.” Therefore there still needs to be some conventions for the message to come across successfully.

Can local languages truly find their own distinct conventions and structures? Are they trapped by the dominant design principles? Can dominant powers adapt their narrative for more inclusive conventions?