Aha, now it’s getting interesting! Remembering our eduction we had at the Royal Academy of Arts in Den Haag, you could say there is only a difference between ‘italic’ and ‘cursive’. We described that in our type-basics
. The difference between ‘italic’ and ‘cursive’ is the difference between function and construction. A cursive typeface only tells you something about the construction. It means that the typeface has an uninterrupted, continuous stroke. A cursive typeface still can have any angle, which means it can also be upright.
An ‘italic’ typeface however, tells you something about the function it has within a type family. It means there is a roman typeface, and this ‘italic’ is meant to stress and highlight pieces of text within roman text. But it can still have any shape, any design, interrupted as well as continuous strokes. Anything could basically work as an italic, also a cursive typeface. But an italic is not always a real cursive.
With Auto we created three different italics to explore linguistic possibilities. What happens for example if you design a theatre play, and you’ve got different actors with different voices? How do you graphically represent those? Do you always needs to use several font families for this, or can this be solved within 1 family? Or how do you represent a quote within a quote? Usually designers switch back to roman text within italic text, but wouldn’t it be possible to have an italic text within an italic text which still works as a separate italic text? Questions like these were the starting point for researching and creating the 3 different italics.