The main takeaway for me from the Spiekermann reading was how much typefaces impact our reading experience, yet how little we think about or analyze the typefaces we encounter on a day to day basis. For example, it is crazy to me how we have only used a single font for most books, making the reading experience not much different that it was many years ago. Additionally, his point about the inefficiency of newspaper typefaces made me reflect on the times I have complained about its weird formatting but never really questioned it. Finally, the “match the shoe to the type face” exercise was a very clever way of suggesting that our typeface recognition and association is almost instinctive and universal. We are so used to identifying patterns and creating meaning out them that the subtle or apparent differences in types (different widths, serif or sans serif, all caps or lowercase, rugged edges or clean lines) evoke a collective emotional response.