In Defence of Comic Sans by Julia Ivanszky

Julia Ivanszky

IN DEFENCE OF COMIC SANS

Comic Sans x

A study outlining taste and judgment around typography and the impact of mistreatment on typefaces such a Comic Sans and Helvetica.

I never understood what was wrong with Comic sans, but after some research and this paper I came to the conclusion that...

...There is nothing wrong with it. 3

“People who don’t like Comic Sans don’t know anything about design” Vincent Cornare

Contents

1. Glossary

2. Introduction

3. The evolution of type and the changing role of the

typographer since the cultivation of the digital era 4. The definition of a good typeface and the factors of its

success (or its failure) 5. Helvetica and Comic Sans: History, success and failure

6. Comic Sans for Cancer: A different approach towards the

typeface 7. Conclusion

8. Bibliography

y r a s s o l G

ical ass l c t in tury par cen l a h i t c ase 15 cru eb he a t h t o d s e rs t etic laye es wer refe mp esth c y r a a o d f r f s. i e pe stu the l ty ess form o his a n t f s i i c f r i n i s e nd e se uty hos clas wed a wer he sw Bea o T e l e l . c n im fo efa at t esig e that typ t th nd c a r a s e f e d face mo typ ype ery T v . t e n to ine em are e rok d y st d ere o eb nsid h o ere t c sw de he i e t s c o n a ei rs t pef ey pac refe ock ty y th ity a y ty s h d l p o p B il m ). et t gra ce, gib ee 005 tan ry, y ad. Le ypo s 2 t s th u i , n t i n s r n i i r e nte arr h ce rd to r with me. Fo cou dH 15t ity i n a e r t e. e a h a h i e h l T e tim th nd nt mi i t a h ros t a a i e e b F l l ity ib ib es w (Am ibil leg leg ang leg ed h d il r c e e r e sid rity nsid ilia con e co re fam b can refo the d the an and e lin ase as a eb h sed 05). t u n s i 0 ee x’ is, 2 etw er ‘ arr eb lett H c e n d a h s. T e an dist ros tter the e b l o t m ase ’ (A ied the er c ppl tom t w a o o l e at b m r r k d o e o r an at ing ll st op ’ is ke. end th t sma c ght i o s a stro e a b l y h t a n b t a o d e ‘x flat izon of n ifie ‘Th hor it is ine ent l r d e i o n s a u e al me nb eca rtic eb s ca ain ve f g i u r ga Se m of a end

t u a Be

ty i r lia

rs e t n

i m Fa

Cou

t h g ei

x-h

r e s s

San On

ces

a pef

if ty s do

rif s se

, sa rary

nt e co

Ser

p y t if . s do

rif t se

st oke r t s all

e sm

h ve t t ha

s e c fa

Introduction

In contemporary culture, type is everywhere; information spotted on every corner and displayed on purchased products, road signs, books, buildings, walls and anything essential for human communication. Consumerist society depends on type and without it and the signs to guide them; an individual could be lost, misguided and even misunderstood. Type and writing has been an important factor in our lives since the ancient ages of the human race and has flourished to become one of the main aspects of expression ‘since the creation of the alphabet’ and it has been developing since then (Ertep, 2012). The craft responsible for the design of type is known as typography, ‘the means by which a written idea is given a visual form’ (Ambrose; Harris, 2005, pg.6) which consists of a variety of characters depending on language, and appears in a selection of styles, called typefaces. Typefaces exist in a variety of shapes, volume, style and personalities and play a crucial part in conveying emotions and information to the reader (Walters, 2013). Type and typefaces still continue to evolve to this day, changing form and functionality, most of which are based on the foundations of classical typeface designs whose structure and ‘beauty’ still play an important role in modern typography (Spiekermann and Ginger 2003, pg. 173). Although, typography was not as easy as it seems today in our digital world, quite the opposite, it was once a complicated craft that required skills, expertise, knowledge and patience (Meggs, 2001, pg.7). Typographers were masters of type design whose job was to compose type and print from it, however the process was an expensive and very time consuming since each metal letter had to be individually set and aligned with the rest on a letterpress (Loxley, 2006, pg. 236). However, society and technology evolved, so did typographers and the need for new type. Typography, which also refers to printed type changed; five hundred years of printing type, has evolved to become the digital typography of the twenty-first century.

However, since the digital typographic era in the 1980s, anyone could create type and use typefaces available to them to create a piece of design or an identity for themselves without the employment of an expert in the field (Loxley, 2006, pg.4-5). This resulted in many inappropriate typographic applications across businesses, stores and advertisements across countries such as the UK and the U.S that have been criticized by type professionals and graphic designers. Simon Loxley (2006, pg. 232) noted that a downside to the fact that anyone could use ‘software like PageMaker’ was the way that type was treated from people who did not have a previous experience with type. In some cases, the blame was laid on the typeface’s appearance and usefulness instead of the non-designers lack of knowledge around type. As a consequence, websites such as Ban Comic Sans have been founded by U.S graphic designers Dave and Holy Combs (2002) to ban the typeface, in order to raise awareness about the typeface and ‘eradicate this font from the face of the earth’. Likewise, there have been multiple occasions where other typefaces such as Helvetica, received a similar treatment, giving a bad reputation to the typeface and called names such as ‘boring’ and ‘predictable’ (Walters, 2013, pg. 72). This raises a question whether the creative application of type on cultural texts is a subject to taste and ‘snobbery’ from the cultural elite [i.e. professional designers] or whether 7

their judgment is due to their knowledge on typography and expertise in the field of type communication. Multiple cultural texts around typography from Editor Steven Heller (2001) will help determine what a good and ‘successful’ typeface is opposed to a bad one, as well as the factors responsible for this choice. Furthermore, secondary sources such as ‘Stop Stealing Sheep & find out how type works’(Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003) will support findings around

typographic development and the changing role of the typographer, while texts from Simon Loxley (2006) will reinforce the idea of typographers having an impact around judgement, but not taste in typography. The typefaces Helvetica and Comic Sans, some of the most overused typefaces of the modern day, will be used as examples of typefaces that fell out of favour by their misuse, which influenced their reputation.

x The evolution of type and the changing role of the typographer since the cultivation of the digital era

Typefaces evolved over time, from print to digital screens, and radically changed form and appearance while more families were created at the same time; however, it was not accidental. Typefaces emerged and were designed out of necessity; new developments in technology called for new typefaces (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg.35). The book ‘Fifty Typefaces That Changed the World’ (Walters, 2013) presents the most important typefaces that left their mark and changed the world of design, explaining how they advanced and formed into what designers know in current design. Walters (2013) mentions that the typefaces that we designers know in contemporary culture have been inspired from the ‘earlier typefaces which act as a base’ and that the tweaks on the fonts change how they act or what their purpose is. If the typefaces that already exist do not answer the criteria that is needed for a task then the typographer copies it and ‘corrects it’ to satisfy the current fashion standards (Reed, 1920, pg. pg.6). Al-

dine ‘Italic’ is an example of a typeface that was invented out of necessity, to save space and fit more words in a column, and therefore spend less money on printing after ‘the collapse of the credit market’ (Walters, 2013, pg. 12). In a similar way many typefaces such as the first ‘fat face’, the first Egyptians, wood types, typewriter fonts, working class typefaces (Gothics & Grotesques) and many more were designed to serve a specific purpose; to meet the demands of new technology and the ever-changing society (Walters, 2013). Spiekermann notes that ‘With every technological and cultural development in the last 2000 years, type and typography reflect this’, therefore type is the mirror of society and what is happening within it (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2013, pg. 35). Companies and corporations hired typographers or ‘type founders’ to create a typeface that would solve their problem and meet their needs, like newspaper corporations who strived for readable typefaces, sign makers who needed clear typefaces that could

“With every technological and cultural development in the last 2000 years, type and typography reflect this”

“Perfect typography is certainly the most elusive of all arts. Sculpture in stone alone comes near it in obstinacy.” Jan Tschichold be seen from a distance and printing companies that needed attention grabbing typefaces. Even though typographers are the professional designers and in control of their designs, they are not in control over type’s future and how it develops, but like Talbot Baines Reed (1920, pg. 15) mentions they are ‘their servant to command’. The job of the typographer is ‘an obscure profession’ (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg.15) and has been compared by authors such as Laura Chessin (1920), Reed (2004) and Walters (2013) to professions such as musical instrument making, artists and musicians, suggesting the difficulty and finesse of the profession. The difficulty of their training is much like musicians, who need time and practice to learn and master an instrument (Chessin, 2004). On another note Reed (1920) compares the profession of a typographer to painters, sculptors and architects believing that a type designer’s job is more difficult than of those who ‘ have their models in nature’. He states that the person who creates type has no models in nature and that he merely depends on the ‘copy left to him by former artists’ (Reed, 1920, pg.). Therefore, it can be said that the profession itself is tough and needs knowledge of history and style as well as attention to detail to master. 9

Nevertheless, the arrival of the digital era changed typography and the role of the typographer. Anyone with a personal desktop computer could be their own typographer in a way that was impossible before – typesetting, once was an expensive, closed – shop service, that guarded preserve of trained professionals, has become available to anyone with space on their work surface for a computer’ (Loxley, 2006, pg. ). As a result many typographic ‘crimes’ were committed from those who lacked the knowledge of typesetting, such as squashing letterforms, stretching and condensing titles and columns on a digital screen, which 10

lowered the quality of typography at the time (Loxley, 2006, pg. 232). But another point of view was that the low quality of type was due to the digital screens which had not developed enough for the typefaces, resulting in ‘low-res’ and ‘illegible’ letterforms (Butterick, 1996, pg. 41). The digital era has been the worst time for typographers; the craft of type was not considered as an art form and it did not receive the same copyrights such as images and music online, therefore type was imitated most of the time and artists were not paid for what the deserved (Zapf, 1986, pg.34). Hermann Zapf (1996, pg.34) even mentions that some people claimed that the typefaces online were claimed to be public domain and not the artist’s work. It has to be agreed that technology and digital screens have developed a great deal since the 1980s and typographers are copyrighted the appropriate way. It seems that the start of digital era appeared to be the end of typography at the time, but for many like Loxley (2006, pg. 236) digital typography has been the start of a cheaper and faster way of creating type. New developments in technology need new solutions in typography, therefore the profession of the typographer will not ‘die’, only the ways of designing a typeface will change. However, as mentioned above, typographers have no control over the outcome of a typeface, or how it will be used), therefore they are just the designers of the alphabet and not what influences it (Walters, 2013). Typographers may have ‘judgement’ over certain typographic applications from non-designers, but it could be entirely because of the knowledge they possess for understanding what is appropriate or not in design and for the audience. It is understood that non-professional designs can be misleading and not clear with their communication, but it is not clear why some typefaces such as Comic Sans and Helvetica are misjudged and called names such as ‘ugly’ and boring. Especially Comic Sans, has been prosecuted as a bad typeface by professionals, while Helvetica ran out of fashion even after its success. Examining what a good typeface is opposed to a bad one while defining the factors of one’s success will help outline whether Comic Sans is as bad as presented and the reasons of typefaces falling out of favour.

“Typographic style is founded not on any one technology of typesetting or printing, but on the primitive yet subtle craft of writing.” Robert Bringhurst

The definition of a good typeface and the factors of its success (or its failure) x

abcdef ghijklm nopqrstu vwxyz Bell Centennial

Typefaces have evolved in different formats, shapes, sizes and classes but they always had the same purpose; they were and are responsible to inform and communicate with the audience (Byrne, 2004, pg.2). In order for type to work correctly and therefore evoke emotion and communication, the typefaces have to be chosen on criteria such as history, readability, legibility, functionality and beauty, depending what job they are going to serve (Heller, 2004). According to Talbot Baines Reed (1920, pg.6), the criteria exists primarily in the legibility of the typeface and secondly in its beauty but also notes that ‘the truest beauty in art is that which suggests utility’, making it clear that type’s most important trait is its purposefulness. Readability and Legibility apply to printed text and are the most important elements that typographers have to consider when choosing a typeface. Readability is the ease with which a written text can be understood by a reader when applied to big amounts of texts such as in books, magazines and newspapers, whilst ‘legibility refers to whether a short burst of text

“A good typeface is well crafted and useful, and sets up into attractive-looking words. It also holds together as a complete system, where individual letters don’t distract the reader. A good typeface doesn’t make you wonder what you might do with it, or why it exists.”

N F igure 1: Bell Centennial

such as headline, catalogue, list, a stop sign is instantly recognisable’(Williams, 2006, pg. 33). Consequently, if a small sized text written in a

typeface whose purpose is eye-grabbing attention or beauty and elegance, can be considered bad type, since the body text would be illegible (Reed, 1920, pg. 6). In some cases, typefaces are only designed for a specific reason, like Bell Centennial, designed by Matthew Carter in 1978 for telephone directory printing, and are considered ‘good’ when used for that specific reason (Walters, 2013, pg. 86). Figure 1 (Walters, 2013) demonstrates Bell Centennial, which has been designed with wide counters to avoid ink spoilage when printed in small text sizes for newspapers. As soon as the typeface designed for 6-point text is applied on a job like headlines, the details of the letters that were not visible at that small size currently are, making the typeface look clumsy and badly executed. Therefore typographic choice requires a basic knowledge of the typeface’s functionality so the right choice can be made otherwise it results in bad typography if applied for unsuitable jobs. In an interview in the book ‘Lettering & Type’ (Willen and Strals, 2009, pg. 125), Christian Schwartz is asked about his opinion regarding what a good typeface consists of and his answer was: “A good typeface is well crafted and useful, and sets up into attractive-looking words. It also holds together as a complete system, where individual letters don’t distract the reader. A good typeface doesn’t make you wonder what you might do with it, or why it exists.” It is hard to define what a good typeface consists of, but each typographer has a different opinion and taste around the subject. According to Spiekermann (2003, pg. 173), in 13

some cases when picking typefaces ‘actual problem solving often seems not to matter’ arguing that the true classic typefaces, the ones who originate from the fifteenth century, are the ones that usually win awards in ‘ modern design annuals’. Although beauty and elegance are important in design, they may not be the most vital factors when making appropriate typographic choices. It is possible that the aesthetics can win design awards but it might not be considered important when utility is the main aim. The essence of typography was once its beauty and grace, yet typography requires clarity today, because of ‘all the extraordinary amount of print, which demands the greatest economy of expression’ (Tschichold, 1995, pg.115). However, famous American emigree Beatrice Warde (1970, cited in Loxley, 2006, pg. 2) argues that it does not matter the kind of type you choose, as long as it is good and clear and it communicates the message it intended from the start. She states that for her ‘that’s as far as it goes... To me it is not so important how the idea is communicated, provided it successfully gets across from one mind to another’. Agreeing with her statement, a good typeface depends occasionally on what it communicates with the audience. Sometimes, in order for design to have an impact on the audience, typefaces have to convey emotions while other typefaces are used to bring eras back to life (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg. 45-51). Artist Bob Bahr (2006) explains in his paper how the typographic knowledge and application on drawings and designs can bring cultural eras back to life. Although some typefaces are not as fortunate and have a darker and ‘deeper meaning behind them’, like for example the German typeface Fraktur, associated with the German Nazis and Adolf Hitler during the war. Today anything written in Fraktur, even the most innocent word can signal ‘iron-fisted authority’ (Heller, 1994, pg.42). Therefore, typefaces can be good or bad depending on cultural context and the way they are used (Millen and Strals, 2009, pg. 2). Typographers tend to have a different taste around type, which is determined on what influenced their career, or what the type trends were at the time, but their taste does not influence a typeface’s success. The same way the definition of a good typeface changes, the success of a typeface depends on a number of factors. A successful 14

typeface is designed for a specific purpose and has an idea behind it, so the job it was designed for will result in its success, while most typefaces advertised on typographic websites are designed out of leisure rather than an idea (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg. 71). Those typefaces are more unlikely to become successful due to their non-purposeful and clumsy look. Some current universal typefaces, were hated and were out fashion when they were first designed, some did not get accepted by society, or were successful for a number of years and then out of fashion (Walters, 2013). A perfect example would be the first Sans serifs, which were unfashionable for their era in 1816 and were considered ‘barbaric’ and illegible at the time. Yet in the twenty-first century, they are the most used and utilised typefaces, and they have a vast use (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg. 2). They developed enough to be used for print and digital media, which allows them to be flexible for all purposes. It can be argued that the success of a typeface does not depend upon its shape but mostly depends on current trends, luck, fashion, technological developments, timing and familiarity (Walters, 2013, pg. 6).

If typefaces like Helvetica and Comic Sans, answer the criteria of readability, legibility, purposefulness, and right communication, the reason for a bad name is not direct, as well as the reason they are rejected by designers but favoured and immensely used by non-designers.

Helvetica

Why do you think I am boring?

Comic Sans Ms x

Why do you call me ugly?

Helvetica and Comic Sans: History, success and failure

Both Helvetica and Comic Sans are loved and hated by individuals, while considered successful and unsuccessful the same time. Comic Sans is said to be the most talked about typeface in the design world and the most used typeface by non-designers (Comic Sans for Cancer, 2014). However, it did not win the likeness of designers, who ‘cringe’ whenever they see Comic Sans (Comic Sans for cancer, 2013, pg. 72). On the other hand, Helvetica, which was favoured by the elites, is considered boring and ‘overused’ in modern design. Understanding the history and the difference between the two forms will help recognise their potential as typefaces and the reason behind their bad reputation [e.g. Figure 2; Figure 3].

Helvetica Bold

abcdef ghijklm nopqrstu vwxyz 123456789 0,.!ÂŁ%^&*() Figure 2 : Helvetica typeface

Comic Sans Bold

abcdef ghijklm nopqrstu vwxyz 123456789 0,.!ÂŁ%^&*()

Figure 3 : Comic Sans typeface

Helvetica, designed by Max Miedinger in 1957 for Haas foundry, was considered the most successful typeface in the 1950s, but was a result of correct timing (Walters, 2013, pg. 72). Walters (2013) explains how the typeface ‘hit the market at exactly the right time’, making it one of the most famous typefaces known today amongst designers. According to the book, the typeface was thought of as an accident – ‘the result of supply and demand and astute marketing by the Haas foundry at a time when Swiss Modernism was transforming the post- war industrial war’ (Walters, 2013, pg. 72). As luck and trends play a crucial part in the success of a typeface, Helvetica was designed to answer the requirements of technology at the right time. As a form, Helvetica is a sans serif that was inspired from Akzident-Grotesk and was designed with a neutral look for clarity and no inherent meaning, so it could be used on a variety of signage. Since the typeface has been such a big hit in the 1960s, a documentary called ‘Helvetica’ was filmed regarding the typeface, its history and success with multiple famous typographers expressing their opinion about the font. Most of designers who were featured in the film still favour the typeface today, while some like Spiekermann believe that it is overused and boring (Troy, 2014). In the design world, the typeface’s name radically changed from ‘successful’ to bland and predictable. If we consider that the choice of type was limited in the 1960s and ‘70s when new type was essential for new developments, it is understandable why Helvetica was applied repeatedly. The lack of choice in typefaces at the time was one of the main reasons of its overuse and later bad reputation. Even though, its form is eminent and purposeful, its look is old and overused, which is in some cases the result of typographic application in less and less appropriate contexts (Poynor, 1992, pg. 16). It is certain that with all the vast numbers of typefaces that exist today, it would be foolish and seen bland to choose a typeface that had its moment in the past. Even though Comic Sans has been similarly mistreated by a different audience and in a different era, designers ‘hate it with passion’ making it difficult to understand the reasons behind that statement (Comic Sans for cancer, 2014). Unlike Helvetica, Comic Sans is believed to have hit the market the wrong time, at the start of the digital era when low-resolution desktop 18

“Comic Sans was not designed as a typeface but as a solution to a problem with the often overlooked part of a computer program’s interface, the typeface used to communicate the message” Vincent Cornare computers prevented the creation of good typography (Walters, 2013, pg. 98). Comic Sans was designed in 1994, by Vincent Cornare, when the choice of typefaces on personalised computer desktops was insubstantial. The typeface was originally designed for Microsoft Bob, a kid’s software that featured a dog, whose speech bubble was typed in Times New Roman. Vincent Cornare believed that the typeface was too serious for a dog that talks, so he designed a visually more suitable typeface, one that imitated comic book writing. Since it was designed too late and the speech bubble’s dimensions did not match the ones of the typeface, it was not included in Microsoft Bob, but was later published with Microsoft Office 95 Plus (Cornare, no date). Published amongst six other typeface (Arial, Courier New, Times New Roman, Merlett Symbols, Wingdings and Symbols), it was considerably the only ‘friendly’ looking typeface (Vsauce, 2013). It appeared on thousands of screens and it was a default font on Microsoft Internet explorer and Microsoft publisher and so available for everyone with a computer. To differentiate typefaces from one another, especially those of the same kind (serif, sans serif, etc.), an eye for detail is needed and some knowledge around typeface forms. Comic Sans’ appearance was unusual and eye grabbing for a desktop user, sometimes more pleasing than a casual font (Cornare, no date). Comic Sans appeared to be the only one at the time that was different on screen, and was available for public use. Arguably, the font was

Wh yd @6 @j C bd son o I e ’ve dy mic o yo sig –C n n e om ver – I d Sa u di ic S on’ fou ans ns? slik t nd =a a n like b ma e e ec a ed teu u t r is h

se se I t h it fo i s ed r an nk it’s fon y th u t in ing gly. P @k P ow ey lu (ab u

@s o cha faem p lkb s er p … b lim oar loyed ec r oin dh –o e c e sh i t); o a v a nd ppe use u ative ve r w r i er u se – n d -u s t i ng a nd for it’s wit ed t u u he on abu g n ly – ver atel T he s e y @c yP it’s [me: Sim [...] C h eas W pso look com rison y to hy’s n’s s li g– ics it ke ope rea @m or o Nev d a ugly? n i n Ba r t e t c r h n ’ c g s er h da ] fo bus a nd u m u nd i ine mbrid t su oro s s. g e I’d us i ma table n ev – I l i k ter e r u e Co ial for an mic se y th it fo @a i ng r sc Sa n s t he oth ree in th rig nae er t nc ht b e m ha n r i o i st u l g u p y y. T ht c –F de n t s i n o on oo ce pro t har ntext… fes s, it lo it’s o t isn’t d sio to r w nal oks st ver u bad i ead hich s ed n it upi de s u su so by ign d w @m ally w k h n en ids is N wa ayhem a a ppl nd @m OT sa s i ed par tud tn m t t i y pe o os ody is for sy – I or f – usu i t . t’s co or a T al for here’s mics appr com ly I do , op c b a n’t er t ic. @o f i nd ain n app ut tha riate mm t r fon com so ts. opria ’s abo it lo acrea ic s t u ep goo ans o ti lac t d ne k s s o ve – i f @L e i t for ss s unp t’s b o any ind goM rof ec a a k o e e ivid rea tive ssio use ! l pr ua l any na l oje s w s – Co . o I n t cts ith ’s a ec , un no mic Sa a we de s les b fo n use ns: s it ign too nt n it, s a o k v wf i l ls @S a i la or . t ble bec ephe , o n ve r unt ause i Tiano u se r t d; m – ’ a s so @s i ne Per o st a ra dp ubi hap hte ofte eop q s u I lldo th in nu le u itou s ed wn s ed s a n k it – so ’s da by i nc f orr ove ont e r-u ctly that s ed . 19

Figure 4 : Typeface used inappropriately

suitable for aliased screens (pixelated screens), which made typefaces appear pixelated and hard to read. Thanks to the sans serif form and bigger x-height of the typeface, it was more pleasing to read than typefaces such as Times New Roman, whose serif form was not as appropriate (Vsauce, 2013). Cornare (no date) mentions that the typeface was never meant to be used the way it was, saying ‘Comic Sans was not designed as a typeface but as a solution to a problem with the often overlooked part of a computer program’s interface, the typeface used to communicate the message’. Nowadays, it is inappropriate used on signage, cars, advertisements, even gravestones, which is of great concern (The Guardian, 2010) [e.g. figure 4]. The fact that a typeface designed for a computer screen is used for print jobs it was not designed for, just shows how much typographic knowledge is needed for correct choices. Countless efforts have been made to prevent the usage of the typeface, from creating websites to alternating the font. Websites like ‘Ban Comic Sans’ exposed the ‘ugly’ side of the typeface, by sharing images of its improper use and 20

cynical comments regarding the typeface, but never its capabilities. Furthermore, Australian designer Craig Rozynski alternated the typeface and called it Comic Neue, giving the typeface a more structurally accurate and character. In the reviews of the new font designer Vincent Cornare shared his disapproval of the new look by stating ‘its shite’ and mentioning ‘that it was never meant to be used in most of the ways that it has been’ (Little Black Book, 2012). Despite the fact that it is more structurally and aesthetically ‘correct’, it lost the clumsy charm that it had before. Regardless, the alternation will not resolve issues related around type awareness and correct use. Unfairly, Comic Sans has been excluded from graphic design textbooks and was never taught as a font to master, so the abilities of the font were never exploited or utilised. Based on experience, students are told by no means to use the typeface, followed by comments such as it being ugly and having no purpose in design, which can be seen as quite careless and arrogant. The previous inappropriate uses of the typeface should not be a reason to exclude it from teaching. However, even though Comic Sans’ typographic applica-

tion seems ugly and inappropriate for Graphic Designers, perhaps the contextual meaning of the typeface is different for non-designers. After all bad typography exists only for those who have the knowledge of what good type is. For those who lack the understanding around type functionality, bad typography is merely just the creation of their eyes, the same way some human faces are more appealing than others (Spiekermann and Ginger, 2003, pg.55) are. Moreover, typography is not only for the elites but it is a way of expression for every individual that wants to communicate an idea or show individuality. Ertep (2012) agrees with this by stating in his paper that ‘If an individual or corporation prefers to use Comic Sans instead of Arial or Times Roman in a formal document this is not because the correspondence is not taken seriously, but because the conviction is that the chosen font is an accurate representation of oneself’ (Ertep, 2012). Additionally, Ertep (2012) explains in his study that the visual treatment of typography in a society is bound to its educational system and values and so when professionals criticise type, they criticize ‘society’s values’ too. The typeface also appears to be number one choice for schoolchildren for its readability and friendliness. A conducted research on the readability of screen typefaces showed that kids aged 9-11 preferred Comic Sans appearance over other typefaces such as Times New Roman, Courier and Arial. The study argued that the preference of Comic Sans could be due to their sans serif like handwriting, which imitates the looks of the typeface ‘and thus perceive sans serif typefaces as easier to read than the serif typefaces’ (Bernard et al., 2002). Children that are more familiar with their handwriting and comic booklike writing can find it easier to read something that imitates it; therefore, it is a matter of familiarity. If the choice of typefaces is a way of expression and individuality, it should not be criticised by professionals. Evidently, the font is not responsible for its bad treatment but is an outcome of bad timing and a situation where the choice of typefaces on screens was insignificant. While Comic Sans has been used unsuitably since its creation by non- professionals and excluded from graphic design textbooks, it is questioned whether the typeface has a more appropriate use to it and whether designers are mistaken about its purposelessness.

“If an individual or corporation prefers to use Comic Sans instead of Arial or Times Roman in a formal document this is not because the correspondence is not taken seriously, but because the conviction is that the chosen font is an accurate representation of oneself” Ertep Hassan

This is me, I am fun, and you are way too serious, Deal with it!! 21

Comic Sans for Cancer:

A different approach towards the typeface A recent fundraiser event called ‘Comic Sans for cancer’ is proof that the typeface bears individuality and character, while demonstrates the misuse it suffered in the past. The event was curated by designers Chris Flack, Renee Quigley & Jenny Theolin to raise funds for Cancer Research UK through an exhibition, which was dedicated to the typeface that ‘We all love to hate’, Comic Sans (Comic Sans Cancer, 2014). Two hundred designers from thirty-eight different countries took part in designing a poster that reflected their thoughts and feelings towards Comic Sans. Results showed that the posters were typographically considered pieces that reflected the character of the font and its potentials as a form. Even though most of them were cynical and funny, they perfectly demonstrated the abilities of a misused typeface. A video shot at the event questioned graphic designers about their opinion regarding Comic Sans, and whose opinion transformed positively from negative reviews in the past. Designers admitted their dislike towards the font previ22

ously, but declared that the typeface possesses character and holds potentials for design (Jonathan Nicol, 2014). Although not appropriate for all typographic jobs, Comic Sans proved to be the right choice for some occasions such as Comic Sans for Cancer and shows to be appropriate for this event (Comic Sans for cancer, 2014). Even if the typeface has been applied satirically in the exhibition, perhaps the potentials lie within its fun side. After all, Comic Sans was never created to be taken seriously or to be used on advertising material, but as a ‘friendly and fun typeface’ (Jonathan Nicol, 2014). Chris Flack (2014) even believes that Comic Sans might even make a comeback this year and restore its bad reputation. Nevertheless, there is no such thing as bad type only the mistreatment of it. Like Spiekermann (2003, pg. 173) once wrote ‘in the right hands, technical constraints turn into celebrations of simplicity, and awkward alphabets are typographic heroes for a day. There is no bad type’.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;All typefaces are a tribute to the ingenious, talented designers and craftspeople, many of them anonymous, who have given us this delightful feast of letterformsâ&#x20AC;? John L Walters

Conclusion The technical constraints at the beginning of the typographic digital era changed the way type was used and altered from a printing shop profession to an everyday task that everyone with a computer had to undertake. However, the fast design process on screens lowered the quality of type. Type standards and requirements changed; classical type beauty and aesthetics were the key to good typography in the past, while clarity has the utmost of importance at the present. In his paper Reed (1920) stated ‘it is a bad day in the history of any art when it becomes a mere trade, and the “art which preserves all other arts” should by all means be saved from the calamity’, which by current standards can be viewed as snobby. The meaning of good typography shifts and adjusts to the requirements of current developments and technology, and so societal changes affect the success of a typeface (Ertep, 2012). Whether Helvetica and Comic Sans are considered unsuccessful and boring by elites, they have to be reminded that the designing process and bad timing affected the typefaces and their use. These typefaces stand as a reminder of technological and societal developments over the last five hundred years. Their overuse and in Comic Sans’ case, misuse should not outline their fate and bad reputation. Considering that typographers were the professionals of type design and hold the knowledge of type’s real powers, transformations occur depending on present-day reading requirements, and so the non-professional public has the most influence over future type transformations (Reed, 1920, pg. 15). Designers’ taste and judgement around type mostly affects trends in the design world however; elitism does not influence how the public perceives type. It will remain an absolute way of expression that is not ruled by typographic imperatives. Typographic crimes will continue to exist unless typography is taught to the majority of individuals that lack the knowledge around it. Nonetheless, the mistreatment of type should not result in typographic judgment and elitism, after all typefaces are ‘a tribute to the ingenious, talented designers and craftspeople, many of them anonymous, who have given us this delightful feast of letterforms’ (Walters, 2013). 25

x Bibliography Books Ambrose G. and Harris, P. (2006) Fundamentals of Typography (Basics Design). Switzerland: AVA Publishing SA. Baines, P. and Haslam, A. (2002) Type and Typography. United Kingdom: Laurence King Publishing. Butterick, M. (1996) ‘Type is Dead: Long Live Type’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 39-41 Heller, S. (1994) ‘Designing Hate: Is There a Graphic Language of Vile Emotion?’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 42-44 Heller, S. (2004) The education of a typographer. United States: Allworth Press, U.S. Loxley, S (2006) Type: the secret history of letters. United Kingdom: I. B. Tauris & Company,Limited. Poynor, R. (1992) ‘American Gothic’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 51 Reed, T.B. (1920) ‘Old and New Fashions in Typography’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 6-15 Robin, W. (2006) The Non-Designer’s Type Book: Insights and Techniques for Creating 26

Professional-Level Type. United States: Peachpit Press Publications Spiekermann, E. and Ginger, E.M. (2003) Stop Stealing Sheep & find out how type works. 2nd Edition. California: Adobe Press. Tschichold, J. (1995) ‘The Principles of the New Typography’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 115-128 Tubaro, A. and Tubaro, I. (1995) Lettering: studies and research on the evolution of writing and printing. Italy: Idea Books, Italy. VanderLans, R. (1997) ‘The Trouble with Type’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 223-227 Walters, J.L (2013) Fifty Typefaces That Changed the Word. United Kingdom: Conran Octopus Ltd. Willen, B. and Strals, N. (2009) Lettering and Type: Creating Letters and Designing Typefaces. United States: Princeton Architectural Press. Zapf, H. (1986) ‘A Plea for Authentic Type Design’ in Heller, S. and Meggs, P.B. (ed.) Texts on Type: Critical Writings on Typography. New York: Allworth Press, Pg. 34-35

Journals Bahr, B. (2006) Using Typefaces and Letterforms. American Artist: Drawing, 3, 9, pp. 80-89. Bernard, M.L. Chaparro, S.B. Mills, M.M. and Halcomb, C.G. (2002) Examining children’s reading performance and preference for different computer-displayed text. Behaviour & Information Technology, 21(2), 89-96. Ertep, H. (2012) Typography as a Form of Cultural Representation. The International Journal of the Arts in Society, 6, 3, pp. 45-56. Lacher, M. (2010) I’m Comic Sans, Asshole. Creative Review, 30, 8, p. 49.

Websites Ban Comic Sans (2002) About. Available at http://bancomicsans.com/main/?page_id=7/ (Accessed: 1 December 2014). Comic Sans for Cancer (2014) Comic Sans for Cancer. Available at http://www.comicsanscancer.com/#home/ (accessed: 9 February 2015).

The Conversation (2010) Is Comic Neue the new Comic Sans – sans the comedy? Available at http://theconversation.com/is-comicneue-the-new-comic-sans-sans-the-comedy-25697/ (Accessed: 25 November 2014). The Guardian (2010) In defence of Comic Sans font. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2010/jun/20/in-defence-comic-sans-font (Accessed: 11 February 2014)

Videos Jonathan Nicol (2014) Comic Sans for Cancer Exhibition. Available at http://vimeo. com/107852517/ (Accessed: 25 October 2014). Samandanita (2008) Comic Sans. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9YGorDqVCM (Accessed 28 December 2014). SBS2Australia (2014) Comic Sans Must DieThe Feed. Available at https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=CupJsrSqk2A (Accessed 3 February 2015).

Cornare, V. (no date) Comic Sans. Available at: http://www.connare.com/whycomic/ (Accessed: 23 November 2014).

Troy (2014) Helvetica Documentary. Available at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=t__AN6d8FWQ (Accessed: 27 December 2014).

Little Black Book (2012) In Defence of Comic Sans. Available at http://lbbonline.com/ news/in-defence-of-comic-sans/ (Accessed: 23 November 2014).

Vsauce (2013) A Defense of Comic Sans. Available at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=GUCcObwIsOs (Accessed 28 December 2014) 27

! L O L