Helvetica

I really enjoyed the film Helvetica, as I found it interesting to hear the different views on typography and the type Helvetica from a variety of designers. The things that I was not aware of before I had seen this film are; the fact that when Helvetica first came out designers loved neutralism and that is why they loved the type as it was clean and neutral. I also did not know its history, e.g. that it was designed by Edward and Alfred Hoffman in the 1960s in Switzerland and that it was Stempel who mentioned that idea of first calling the typeface Helveti (which is Latin for Switzerland). They decided to change it Helvetica as Edward Hoffman did not want to call it after a country.

 Specific things surprised throughout the film such as, the amount of designers who have different views on type, some of these were; that type should be expressive and should communicate the word it is trying to show and it should give a feeling/emotion, another view was that type should have an order therefore must aligned in grids and always be readable. It was surprising to see what Helvetica meant to a variety designers and how almost every opinion which was given was different in one way or more.

Parts of the film were quite humorous, for example when one of the designers pointed out Helvetica used in every life on the streets, and it was unbelievable how many things it was used for but where unnoticed e.g. Litter on a street bin. The amount that was shown was so surprising that it made you laugh. Also the way Stefan Sagmeister described what he felt and saw when he looked at Helvetica, how when it is used in just black lettering on the front of booklet which was white it said do not read me am boring, this added humour to the film. I also agreed with his point slightly that sometimes when a typeface is used and it is too simple and is just placed in black lettering on white paper it can look boring and not interest the reader at all.

A new designer that I would like to look into more detail is Michael C. Place this is because he was honest in saying how he did not know the technical side to typography but likes to take something ordinary and make it look beautiful, and enjoys designs that give the viewer emotion and feeling when looking at the piece. He also likes the idea of Helvetica and takes pride in taking the challenge of trying to change it to make it more beautiful but still recognisable as the typeface. The pieces of his own work that he showed I thought were rather interesting, and you could clearly see that he was taking an ordinary typeface and adding something to it to make more attractive to glaze upon. Another designer I found interesting was David Carson, however he not a new designer to myself, this is because I studied him during my time doing Advanced Art. All though it was great to hear his opinion of typography and I was not aware that he did not actually study it and thought it was inspiring that he just did what he felt was right and came out a great result at the end. I like the point he made about how type should communicate a feeling or emotion and used an article he designed as an example which he done in the font Dingbats, this was because he felt that the article was badly written and was boring to read and decided it was not worth reading therefore put it a typeface which was not legible.

At the start of the film I personally felt that they about the technical side to typography and go into great detail about the anatomy of Helvetica, which Carter explains and why certain parts of it were made that way, however meaningful statements about the type are added in now and again. As the film progresses the description of typography becomes a lot more expressive and meaningful and it discusses how type communicate something e.g. the smoothness of Helvetica almost looks humanist, and how it can affect someone.

After seeing the film, the way I will approach talking about type in the future I will be describing how it communicates what the design is saying and why it was chosen for that particular use. I would also go slightly into more detail in the technical side for example about the anatomy and hierarchy of the type. The film has made me think a lot more about Helvetica but it has not changed my stance as I was already pro-Helvetica but I would still would only use it for certain things, just communicate information. Even though Helvetica has been around for years and is everywhere, so I have grown up seeing Helvetica but its name was something I was not aware of it until recently. I think I would mainly use Helvetica for a something that has to be readable for example a sign or a main body of text.