Of course he is not condoning blatant clones or ripoffs, but the point I believe he’s making is that perhaps we could/should celebrate the differences rather than the similarities, because, to be frank, a great many typefaces resemble metal type from the fifteenth century, that in turn resemble fifteenth-century Humanist book-hands, that in turn resemble the letters of first-century Roman lapidary inscriptions, and on and on and -īut perhaps it’s time to explain what brought on this article:Īn article on Brand New about Pentagram’s new logo for the University of the Arts London (UAL). In other news, almost all typefaces are kinda similar to other typefaces. But we might arrive at, say, a typeface with neo-grotesk or grotesk attributes, of which Helvetica is but one example.Īs an aside, recently there’s been a lot of chatter about this typeface looking like another, looking like another, ad nauseam and, while there is no excuse for plagiarism, Nick Sherman (in fewer than 140 characters, remember), writes,Īpple’s new watch typeface is kinda similar to other typefaces. Never, ever, ever, by a process of elimination, do we arrive at Helvetica. The final selection is a subjective choice made from a field of worthy and appropriate contenders. Further narrowing down the field: Claw hammer? ball pein? cross and straight pein? club hammer? sledge hammer? soft-face hammer? But never, when it comes to typefaces, can we narrow the field to a single typeface - your typographic soul-mate does not exist in any one typeface. And sometimes, Helvetica will be one of the tools adequate for the job. What’s your favorite tool? Hammer? screwdriver? chainsaw? The choice of typeface is decided only when one knows the nature of the job. Favorite for what? For text? For toilet tissue branding? For books? For UI? For… - you get the point. Hating the hammer?Īnd that’s why it’s difficult for good designers to name their favorite typeface. Need I add, the same can be said for typefaces. It’s not the hammer’s fault: first, it’s an inanimate object without a shred of consciousness or will second, it is simply a tool - frequently - the wrong tool for the job. A hammer, even the best hammer in the whole universe, is really quite useless at removing screws. But most of all he was trying to emphasize the fact that type is a tool. And he wasn’t attempting irony neither was he being facetious. Typeface as hammerĮrik Spiekermann once wrote that there are no bad typefaces. But, above all, Majoor’s text is mostly about Helvetica as an uninspiring reworking of Akzidenz Grotesk. What a missed opportunity!Īnd then, quoting or paraphrasing Paul Rand, I believe:Īnd the haters might say that’s a little unfair - to dog poop. Helvetica is blunt and colourless the fact that its italic is slanted makes it even blunter. Though claimed to be an improvement on Akzidenz Grotesk, it lacks all the character and charming clumsiness of Akzidenz Grotesk. In the past 50 years there have been many beautiful graphic designs using Helvetica, but this has more to do with the quality of the designers using it than with the quality of Helvetica as a typeface.Ĭompared to Akzidenz Grotesk, Helvetica has hardly any new features. Way back in 2007, for Eye magazine, Martin Majoor, not Helvetica’s greatest fan, wrote: But which is which? Unsure? Then take a look at Arial versus Helvetica. Partial alphabets from Arial and Helvetica above. In my opinion, if you hate Arial (and hate really is too strong a verb/noun for discussions about digital typefaces), then you are vicariously hating on Helvetica, whether you like it or not. At least if you are going to hate, then do so consistently. Most Arial haters (and they outnumber Helvetica haters 100:1) would, especially once the most differentiated glyphs are removed, be hard-pressed to tell it apart from Helvetica. It’s oftentimes like that sweater from high school: no matter how much you love it, you’ll never ever look good in it again - and not only because it’s now four sizes too small. Ostensibly, my only gripe with Helvetica (designed by Max Miedinger & Eduard Hoffmann) is not the typeface itself, but how - and how often - it is pressed into service. However, in the meantime, and before I get started - and I promise this won’t take long - let me be clear, I am not, I repeat, not (in bold for emphasis) a Helvetica hater. And by the end of it, you may well concur. Perhaps this article should have ended at the question mark in its title.
0 kommentar(er)
