Typography is the visual component of the written word.

A text is a sequence of words. Texts remain the same no matter how they’re rendered. If I print the sentence “I like pizza” on a piece of paper, or speak it in court, or save it onto my laptop, it’s the same text, just rendered different ways—visually, orally, digitally.

But when “I like pizza” is printed on paper, it implicates typography, because it’s visual. Every written word implicates typography—whether it’s displayed on paper, on a computer screen, or on a billboard.

For example, what’s the difference between these two signs: the text or the typography?

Is typography an art? That’s like asking if photography is an art. Certainly there are photographers and typographers whose ideas and techniques raise their work to the level of art. But at their core, both photography and typography have a pragmatic function. The aesthetic component is separate.

Does that mean that effective typography can be ugly? Sure. Sometimes, ugly is better than pretty. Look at the highway signs again. Objectively, the sign set in the script font may be “prettier” than the standard highway font. But the highway font has a specific function: it’s intended to be read quickly from long distances, at odd angles, and under variable lighting. The script font may look nicer, but it’s inapt for this task. Conversely, the highway font would look terrible on a wedding invitation, where the script font would be right at home.