I remember when I first discovered Helvetica (I was a late-comer...so un-hipster of me). It was at my job and they finally gave me a Mac and there it was in all its wonder. I was obsessed with Helvetica-Neue UltraLight. I wanted it everywhere. So I can definitely see why it took off and people used it in mass production the way they did.
The most interesting part of the documentary, I thought, was the multiple opinions on the font. People either wanted to do everything to stay away from it or praised it for its pure genius. I've never heard so much passionate talk about a typeface before (and the geek inside of me loved it). I believe it was the guy who created Gotham that was talking about how you can say anything in Helvetica and it takes on that meaning. Then David Carson went on the rant about how Helvetica can't possibly be "caffeinated" or "explosive", etc. It was great to see so many different philosophies about typography from such talented people. This was also reassuring that there's no right or wrong way; you just have to be good at what you do. And now some Helvetica hilarity:
The first chapter I read in Just My Type was Chapter 12 about naming fonts you see around you. This chapter spoke to me because I always try to do that and it frustrates me when I can't figure it out or even come up with a guess. It's amazing the little details in each typeface that can giveaway or rule out a guess. I found Marker Felt on a No Parking sign once and immediately sent a picture to my graphic designer friend. Of course, I'm not nearly well-versed enough in the ever-expanding font encyclopedia to have any right to be making my rudimentary guesses, but it's still fun to me. And I'm glad there's a whole community of people who are tickled by the same fancies.
The next one I enjoyed, coincidentally, was the next chapter (13) that talked about Erik Spiekermann, his fonts and philosophy on typography, and the history of German fonts. I thought it was interesting how he said that he never wants people to pick up an editorial piece and say "what a cool typeface", he wants them to say "what a cool article". I think that speaks true to what we do as magazine designers; we're there to communicate to the reader, not to create arrogant design. I also liked his "messy" approach to creating typefaces. He makes imperfect fonts that work. "We have to create warmth in a digital world," he says. The latter part of the chapter goes into the history of the identity of certain fonts (like the gothic fonts with the Nazi Party) and I thought it was incredibly insightful when Matthew Carter was talking about fonts losing their cultural identity in today's society. He talks about how he could have been blindly taken anywhere and know exactly where he was based on the typefaces on buildings, restaurants, etc. But nowadays in the digital age, a font can cross the world in a matter of seconds and never gets a chance to be associated with an origin.
Chapter 16, which is about pirates and clones, was another one of my favorites. I never knew there was such controversy surrounding Arial. Can you see the differences? I think the book is right about how once you do, you can't unnotice them.
No comments:
Post a Comment