i went to see a faculty of communication and design (fcad) dean’s lecture by the creator of p22 font foundry, for the ryerson school of graphic communications management. it was followed by a viewing of Helvetica, a documentary on the ubiquitous typeface. the doc was utterly FASCINATING. it was probably one of the best documentaries i’ve ever seen, and about something that is so widely used, yet little talked about.

many of the uber-nerdy interviewees talked about the Helvetica font (which was designed in switzerland by max meidinger in 1957) on highly abstract and philosophical terms. some of the modernists, such as massimo vignelli, described Helvetica as a cutting-edge messiah-like symbol that delivered the post-war society from goofy fonts and corny advertisements and led way for much more modern, clean-cut and simple advertisements and signs. a ton of footage of signs in Helvetica all around north america and europe sprinkled the documentary: little artsy bits in the tiny corners of cities and the like. for example, the metropolitan transportation authority (MTA) of new york uses Helvetica only for all its signs:

here are pre-helvetica advertisements. note the number of various typefaces used in just one ad alone, often in (what the modernists call ridiculous) italics, curlicues, and the like.

post-helvetica advertisements. note the simplicity of the typeface and the power that comes with the simplicity. the AmericanAirlines wordmark, for example, employs nothing but the company name in Helvetica, as one word, using two primary colours.

American Airlines wordmark enlarged:

as massimo vignelli said in the film: “there are people that thinks that type should be expressive. they have a different point of view from mine”. it had never occured to me before this film that typography shouldn’t express a certain mood, a certain personality. in fact, i thought that typeface designers would be the first to say that typefaces should evoke a certain mood.

but when i heard the modernists, most of whom worship the ubiquitous font, say that a good typeface should be like a “crystal goblet” — absolutely clear, with no visible distraction to take the viewer away from the actual MEANING of what is written — i was convinced that they were right. after all, what matters is what is INSIDE the crystal goblet, and the goblet’s job should be to show what it contains for what it is, not to add elaborations or ornaments to what is inside. here is a quote that contains the phrase “crystal goblet”:

Tobias Frere-Jones: The sort of classical modernist line on how aware a reader should be of a typeface is that they shouldn’t be aware of it at all. It should be this crystal goblet there to just hold and display and organize the information. But I don’t think it’s really quite as simple as that. I think even if they’re not consciously aware of the typeface they’re reading, they’ll certainly be affected by it, the same way that an actor that’s miscast in a role will affect someone’s experience of a movie or play that they’re watching. They’ll still follow the plot, but, you know, be convinced or affected. I think typography is similar to that, where a designer choosing typefaces is essentially a casting director.

some other memorable quotes from the film:

Lars Müller: And I think I’m right calling Helvetica the perfume of the city. It is just something we don’t notice usually but we would miss very much if it wouldn’t be there.

Wim Crouwel: The meaning is in the content of the text and not in the typeface, and that is why we loved Helvetica very much.

the documentary also explored the sense of globalism and capitalism that is now associated with the font, as many giant corporations, such as American Airlines, American Apparel, and Lufthansa, use the font as part of their logo and typeface. the documentary interviewed many post-modernists who were sick of the conformity of Helvetica, too. the post-modernist typeface designers thought that typefaces SHOULD evoke a certain personality, and seem to be averse to the uniform, “corporate” Helvetica.

it just blew my mind to hear graphic designers and type designers talk about the font. i am definitely in love with the font, and i am watching the film again sometime, as soon as i can find the dvd.

i write this in the eng 705 reading log because as much as we talked about advertising in class, we never mentioned the power of typefaces as part of the visual advertising, i.e. in signs, billboards, and magazines. it is amazing how much authority a certain typeface can hold: American Apparel, for example, employs nothing but their simple photographs of their unique models and the one typeface — Helvetica. i’d say that the simple cut of the typeface works better than any of the combinations of the messy typefaces used in the 1950s ads. it’s truly amazing how much effect the typeface has alone.

on a side note, i looked for Helvetica on Microsoft Word 2003 and it wasn’t there. i’m told that Apple computers and products (such as ipods) have the font. drat! i am almost tempted to purchase the font off linotype.com. Microsoft has Helvetica lookalikes, such as Arial and Calibri, but the subtle differences actually seem to make a difference, and i am not satisfied with the two lookalike fonts.