I was reading through a design magazine (I'm sorry I forgot what magazine it is, I'll tell you when I remember, because I read it on a stall, ssshhh!) when I came across this article about typography and it's purpose in design in general. It was stated that a typo (I hate typing the whole word, so do forgive my lazy fingers) defines itself and the design it is in. So, when you decided to use one typo in a design, you shouldn't add any more design elements to define your whole stuff, for example, a Helvetica can stand alone in a design to tell you that the look is simple, modern, and so on.
I agree to that, at some point, mainly because my Indonesian clients always think that the more the merrier, in a ridiculous way. In my experience with clients, they always want more than a typo to go with their design. A picture, photograph, illustration, clipart, anything but typo-only. The more you can add to a design, the better. It's like a photograph of a banana with yellow and brown puffy font saying "this is a banana" and below that a watercolor illustration of the banana itself.
But I resent to that theory sometimes, when the "add-ons" to the typo are something related, beautiful, they deserve being there with the type (or embedded in the typo itself, in my picks), and obviously making the typo "speak" louder than before! Check out these example and you might agree with me.