Akzidenz Grotesk: (Berthold Foundry 1898). Even though Akzidenz Grotesk was technically released in the 19th century, it was certainly one of the most important typeface of the 20th century. In response to the Industrial Revolution William Caslon IV offered a monoweight set of capitals without serifs in 1816. In 1832 the Fann Street Foundry brought out a sans serif, which it termed a “grotesque”. By 1850 virtually all type founders were issuing such faces in a confusing variety of widths and weights. As industrial printing moved out of the dark ages, typefaces began reacquiring the sharpness and refinement they once had in transition to their modernization.

 

What made Akzidenz Grotesk truly a stand out was that in its initial release it offered a well-coordinated 10-member family in response to the complex needs of modern communication. By its efforts, not only did (AG) give sans serifs the sort of dignity to move them out of the realm of the 19th century “grotesque”, but by integrating that complexity within the family structure, it turned the corner toward standardization and modularity. Issued in 1898, it was so successful that Morris Fuller Benton followed suit with “Franklin Gothic”, in 1902, the Stempel Foundry with “Reform Grotesk” in 1903, and the Bauer Foundry with “Venus” in 1907, in competition for market share. The popularity of these typefaces began to transform the early 20th century into a landscape for sans serifs, opening the path for the geometric sans to follow.

 

With the ascendance of Swiss typography in the 1950’s, typefaces such as Helvetica and Universe connected back to Akzidenz Grotesk, reaffirming (AG) as the grand daddy of modern sans serifs. Still running strong, Akzidenz Grotesk has retained the memory of that decisive turn. While its forms are modern, many subtle inconsistencies remained. It is those inconsistencies, which give Akzidenz Grotesk the warmth to separate it from the clinical blandness of its grand children. While its stroke terminations are mostly vertical or horizontal, they are not so entirely. The capital “C, G, Q, and S” as well as the lowercase “a, c, e, and s” end at an angle. Such inconsistencies are an indication of the fact that Akzidenz Grotesk was making the turn toward modernity to which it never fully completed.

 

Note the junctions of the shoulder to the stems. A close inspection will show the tapers of the “h and p” are modest, those of the “b, d, and r” more pronounced, while those of the “m, n, q, and u” high. Note also how the dots of the lowercase “i and j” are set on the capline which is too high instead of being in alignment with the ascender of the “t”. Indeed, it is rather surprising that while its stress is vertical, the counter of the lowercase “q” has a slight tilt. There is no reason for that tilt other than a bit of sloppy craftsmanship. As for its capital to lowercase balance, the fact that its x-height is 10% smaller than Helvetica works to its advantage. That smaller size gives its letters a bit more reserve. That smaller size in conjunction with its lighter stroke also gives its letters that touch of delicacy not found in a typical grotesque. So while Akzidenz Grotesk does not have the robust presence of the typical grotesque, it has the virtue of not shouting its message.

 

Since its lowercase letters are smaller, they are surrounded by more white space, making its texture more open, which partly accounts for its sense of repose. Since its letters are more expanded (or more correctly, less compressed), while they are smaller, they are just as distinct and easy to read. Unfortunately, the sense of grace from its smaller size and more relax spacing is not supported by the imbalance between the upper and lowercase stroking. Even a casual look exposes their dissonance. In text, that imbalance make the strokes of the capitals jump out like text set with caps and electronic small caps. Even students of typography understand that true small caps are not merely smaller capitals adjusted to the x-height but the proportion and stroke weight of the lowercase letters. The formula for that proportion is the relative width of the capital plus 1/2 of the difference between the widths of the capital and the lowercase. That is to say the uppercase letters are proportionally narrower and their strokes proportionally lighter than lowercase letters. The stroke proportions of Akzidenz are merely the proportional relations between their heights. As a consequence, the stroke weight of the capital is too heavy. In order to bring that relation into balance, either the stroke weight of the lowercase must be strengthened, which would take away their delicacy, or the stroke of the capitals made thinner. Even though it can be argued that this stroke imbalance is another inconsistency which makes its texture more lively, this oversight is different from the other inconsistencies since it is sufficiently disruptive to act more like speed bumps in the text field. Those speed bumps act to jolt the eyes rather than energizing them in their journey across the text. This is especially so in regards to the wide letters such as the capital “O” to which the stronger strokes are followed by open counters exacerbating the problem. An adjustment of the capitals, by reducing its width and stroke weight would be a welcome one. It should at least be offered as an alternative letter set, even if the historic purist wants to cling to the authenticity of the original forms.

 

Despite the above drawback, Akzidenz Grotesk has remained an extremely functional face for over one hundred years, remaining popular through a number of stylistic eras. It has stuck around not only because of its historical status, but because typographers still find it useful. It has the practicality of a typical neogrotesque, while its inconsistencies give its text that touch of warmth to which contemporary individuals find evermore attractive in a society that has become increasingly impersonal.

Futura: (Paul Renner 1925–1928). Because ideas are beholding to their instantiation, while the aesthetic principles of the Bauhaus formed the foundation of modern design, its aesthetics were beholding to the fieldwork of Jan Tschichold and Paul Renner. Students of typography know that in the early days of the 20th century Akzidenz Grotesk had already created the preconditions that would transform it into a century for sans serifs. Since Akzidenz Grotesk and Futura both came out of Germany, the inquisitive mind cannot help but wonder what accounted for Germany’s radical typographic bent. In retrospect it was the need for simplicity induced by the complexity of the blackletter, which plagued Germany well into the 20th century. Since the Bauhaus’s own dictum advocated for simplicity of form, it was natural that its practitioners would embrace sans serifs. Laszlo Moholy-Nagy said: "Since all existing grotesque book styles lack basic style, a grotesque still has to be created. It should share the designed form of engineering structures, cars, and airplanes. For the moment we don't even have a working style. It should be exceptionally clear and legible, free of individualism, based on a functional appearance, without distortions or embellishments." Its internal practitioners, however, were unsuccessful in creating a functional typeface within the Bauhaus ideology. Fortunately, the beginning of such a model was already in development.

 

Even though Edward Johnston’s 1916 London Underground typeface is better know as the precursor to Gills Sans, close inspection shows that it also contained geometric overtones. In 1925, Paul Renner began his design for Futura and in 1926 he invited Jan Tschichold to teach at his school, which for all practical purposes, had became the typographic extension of the Bauhaus for practitioners. In 1928, the two cornerstones of typographic modernity were laid with Jan Tschichold’s “Die Neue Typographie”, and Paul Renner’s completion of Futura. Renner’s sans serif was so popular that it forced the production of many other geometric sans as foundries competed for market share.

 

The most important reason for its success was Paul Renner’s willingness to diverge from doctrinaire geometric principles to ensure Futura’s functionality in practice. A quick comparison of Futura to its first manifestation shows how far Renner departed from his original idea. Had he not done so, Futura would have been as useless as those facial types coming out of the Bauhaus. A good example of its adaptation is the pronounced thinning of the stroke where the shoulder meets the stem. That “compromise” gave it joints a degree of suppleness to counteract its geometry. While Futura’s capitals are large, its lowercase letters are quite small for a sans serif. The smallness of the lowercase body along with its longish ascenders and descenders keep Futura from looking too coarse or “grotesque”. While the long ascenders extending above the capitals improve the upper to lowercase proportions, it is a break from the modularity of Bauhaus principles. The seminal problem with geometric sans is the overbearing circularity of its forms, which projects its counters forward, thereby compromising word formation and horizontal flow. The verticality of Futura’s ascenders and descenders help to counteract that tendency. The smallness of its lowercase body also helps to choke off the counter’s circular tendency for projection. Note also how the counters of the roundels are not actually circular, but slightly elongated. This subtle vertical thrust also helps to check that tendency towards projection. Insofar as a face such as Avant Garde adheres more strictly to the curricular form, its projecting counters prevent its letters from being embedded into words, which make them considerably more difficult to read.

 

Because of Futura’s small x-height, there is considerable size contrast between its upper and lower case letters, exacerbated by round capitals such as the “C, D, G, O, and Q”. Futura manages to keep that size contrast under control by tucking the capitals under its long ascenders. As a result, the texture of its text is quite well blended. There are, however, some unnecessary inconsistencies. Why, for example, is the leg of the “K” stepped, and the capital “J” extended below the baseline? Why is the capital “L” so narrow? Why doesn’t the lowercase “j” have a hook? Without that hook there is some confusion between it and the lowercase “i”. Why is the lowercase “g” so disproportionately large? And why do the strokes of most letters terminate vertically or horizontally, but not so for the capital “G, J, S” and lowercase “e, r, and s”? Even though Futura is the most readable of all the geometric sans serifs, its round forms prevent it from being tightly fitted.

 

Close inspection shows Futura’s letter spacing is adjusted to the proper relationship between two round letters. While its letter spacing is well managed, because that spacing is very critical, Futura does not handle justification well. The inconsistent spacing that comes with justification makes Futura lose its sense of focus, turning a text that ordinarily engenders a sense of clean systematic thoughtfulness into a scatterbrain that is unable to gather words into well-formed thoughts. Beyond that Futura is solidly grounded in the history and tradition of 20th century typography, it is also beautiful and flexible, functional from book setting to posters. Few faces have such dynamic range, and fewer still with its distinction.

 

Many designers cite a typeface’s alleged “neutrality” as the main reason for using it. However the "timeless" are always products of their times, since designers always reflect the influences to which they are exposed. Inventing a new typeface means inventing a new way of delivering the message, which affects the very nature of communication. Such designs do not come out of nowhere, but develop organically out of the spiritual and material spirit of the time. Futura is not a face of neutrality. It came into being organically out of history. As such, it has defined as well as has been defined by 20th century typography. That, together with its beauty and poise has made it a classic while other geometric sans have simply been washed away.

Helvetica: (Max Miedinger/Edward Hoffman 1957). With the possible exception of Times Roman, Helvetica is the most ubiquitous typeface in use. It has been used for all sorts of applications in just about any printing conditions imaginable. While some typographers see its dead hand as a sign of the desensitization of the discipline, that explanation does not account for its relationship with the broader cultural context.

 

The story of its ascendance goes back to the early 1950’s. After the Second World War, Edward Hoffman of the Haas Foundry noticed a fondness of Swiss designers for Akzidenz Grotesk. He made the perceptive assumption that, while the young designers reacted against the overt geometry of the Bauhaus, they remain committed to the graphic simplicity as articulated through sans serifs. He also noticed the tendency for tighter letter fit unachievable with geometric sans due to their round forms. Motivated by that insight Hoffman asked Max Miedinger to develop a modernized grotesque that would fulfill the new demands. Developed between 1951–53, what emerged was “Neue Haas Grotesk”. In 1957, when Haassche licensed it to the Stempel foundry, the name was changed to Helvetica the Latin name for Switzerland, taking advantage of that association with the then fashionable Swiss Typography to internationally market the face. While both Helvetica and Universe resulted from the reaction against geometric sans, the difference which motivated their inception accounts for their position in typography. Edward Hoffman wanted to develop a contemporary replacement for Akzidenz Grotesk, the resurgence of which had already displaced Futura.

 

On the other hand, Adrian Frutiger's attention was directed at his displeasure concerning the letter fit of geometric sans serifs. A comparison between Helvetica and Universe to Akzidenz Grotesk will illuminate this point. While both faces are larger than Akzidenz Grotesk, Helvetica has the edge in size. Its x-height is just about as large as it can be without being grotesquely so. While its stroke is actually lighter than Universe 55, because it is set tighter, text in Helvetica looks darker. As a result, Helvetica looks like Akzidenz Grotesk pumped-up, not only in its size and stroke weight, but also from its sense of pent up energy. Since Helvetica's x-height is large, in order to achieve a degree of moderation, the proportions of the lowercase letters are made slightly narrow, and adhering to the taste for a tighter letter fit, the letter spacing is set somewhat close. While its letter proportions are still normal, a quick comparison of text set in Helvetica vs. Akzidenz Grotesk will show a slight tendency of Helvetica towards verticality. The issue with its letter spacing, however, is more problematic. That spacing is tight enough to make its letters sit tense, thereby confounding word formation. As a result of its letter size, verticality, and letter fit, Helvetica does not show the sense of poise that Akzidenz Grotesk does in text setting. A reduction in size, with 5% additional leading, will not only lighten its tone, but will also give the text a more confident tram. Some positive tracking in the order of +25/1000 will loosen the letters to give the text a touch of relaxation, which will actually improve its word recognition. A quick comparison of its letters with those of Akzidenz Grotesk will also add insight to its comparison with Universe. Except for the hook of the capital “J”, the tail of the capital “Q”, and the swerve leg of the capital “R”, Helvetica can be considered a rip off of (AG). Except for its larger size, shorter ascenders, and heavier stroking, their lowercase letters are practically identical. Since Universe has a slight squaring to its letter, its difference to Akzidenz Grotesk is more pronounced. However, while Helvetica is obviously modeled after Akzidenz Grotesk, Max Meidinger did manage to “modernize” the new product.

 

While the increased size and stroke weight make Helvetica much more emphatic. And the slightly increased taper where the curve of the shoulder meets the stem acts to counterbalance its weight gain, Helvetica also has a better upper to lowercase stroke balance, making its texture more even. These factors give Helvetica its signature generic look. This, however, brings up an apparent paradox. The rejection of geometric sans by Swiss typography was due to their “mecanique” character. To the extent Swiss typography moved toward the forms of Akzidenz Grotesk, it was a move toward its suppleness. But insofar as Helvetica flushes out that suppleness to achieve its generic blandness, that evolution does seem to signal the dead hand of anonymity. Wrapped in this paradox lies the secret of Helvetica’s success. While Futura was an eloquent expression of modernity, that expression was underpinned by an underlying faith in geometry imbued with a purist ideology. To make its forms more consumable to the post-war market culture, that ideology underlying modernity had to be neutralized. By so doing, Swiss typography inoculated sans serifs for commercial consumption. By making itself more generic, Helvetica provided the freeway of anonymity for corporate consumption. And by connecting itself to Akzidenz Grotesk, Helvetica managed to reconnect itself to those typefaces so fundamental to the development of 19th century markets.

 

With modernity flush clean of its pre-war socialist ideology, the horizon was opened-up for the exploits of international business. While the usage of Neue Haas Grotesk began as a local response to Swiss typography, it found its true calling in the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s in the ever-expanding demand of the cold war culture for anonymity. So while Helvetica established its foothold in Switzerland, its ascendance to the maintaining of its dominant position was the result of its ability to transcend stylistic particularities, by means of its generic character. Long after Swiss Typography receded into the pass, Helvetica is still going strong, and is likely to continue well into the future. It is these same qualities, which some see as the sign of typographic decline, which account for its success. This is a fundamental paradox within the discipline of typography itself. Helvetica fell into and ascended to its dominance by way of that paradox.

Universe: (Adrian Frutiger 1957). Released in 1957, Universe was one of a host of neogrotesque faces, which participated in the displacement of the geometric sans serifs, made popular in the 1930’s and 40’s. The 1950’s were a time when the modernity of the Bauhaus was being transformed into an international style. It was also a moment when multinational business began its global reach to which the universality of the grotesque forms proved useful.

 

To the typographic novice Universe and Helvetica look virtually identical, but to the professional their differences are quite obvious. Universe has been called the French Helvetica, which is to say it has the systemic virtue of a Swiss mind moderated by a French heart. Its subtle contrast, especially where the curve strokes meet the stem, gives Universe a suppleness absent in Helvetica. While still large, its slightly smaller x-height in comparison to Helvetica, not only gives its text more reserve, but its longer ascenders also give its form more poise. That smaller x-height also means its lowercase letters are proportionally wider, which acts to energize its counters. That wider proportion, along with a subtle squaring of its shape gives universe an exceptionally horizontal tram. Where as Helvetica has a vertical thrust, Universe hits a perfect balance between the vertical and horizontal, allowing the eyes to traverse words with ease.

 

Since sans serifs have no serifs to push the eyes horizontally, they generally suffer in the reading process, but Universe seems to have transcended that shortcoming making it acceptable even for book setting. The certitude of its horizontal push means Universe can withstand some looseness in its letter spacing, and Adrian Frutiger took full advantage of that capability. Because each letter is given a bit of elbowroom, despite the fact that Universe is smaller than Helvetica, it feels more open. Were it not for the strength of its tram, that loose fit would not be possible. That generous letter spacing makes Universe exceptionally legible because it allows each of its letters to be articulated with crystal clarity. It is that ability to give its letter that little extra spacing which also accounts for the sparkle that gives Universe a twinkle in its eyes to differentiate it from the blandness of Helvetica. To underscore the subtle interplay of letter spacing and word cohesion, Jan van Krinpen’s Spectrum also has sparkle in its letters. However, since Spectrum’s letters could not pull themselves efficiently into words, they have a tendency to float as if still dangling in an idea. That is not so with Universe. Not only does that touch of “extra” spacing in Universe add sparkle to the reading process, but since its counters are more open than those of Helvetica, and since they are slightly squarish, the counters push outward. This outward push would have made the letter seem more crowded, if there was no “extra” space to counteract its effect. As a result of the balance between its internal counters, strokes, and external counter spaces, however, Universe has an even, calm temperament.

 

A quick comparison between text set in Universe and Helvetica shows Universe to be more composed, with an inner confidence that allows it to enunciate its thoughts clearly. Helvetica by comparison feels a bit dense in both senses of the word, confounded by its own agitation, trying to make up for its confusion by speaking more forcefully. Despite its smaller size and less emphatic stroke, the distinctness of Universe makes diction more punctuated. The confluence of its sparkle, diction, and openness gives Universe its inner energy to sustain reading. Were it not so, its textural evenness as a result of its balance between the positive and negative space and the proportional balance between its upper and lowercase letters would be in danger of becoming tiresome. Because of that inner energy, however, surface agitation that would have been necessary can be tamped down without falling into the pit of typographic boredom. By contrast since Helvetica does not posses that inner energy, it must rely on surface agitated to stimulate vision. The consequence of Helvetica’s surface agitation is its convolution of speech. That convolution must be counterbalanced by a more emphatic voice, which in turn makes Helvetica less poise. This exposé is a good lesson that shouting is not the same as getting the point across. Were that not so, typography would have never moved away from the blackletter. Since typography is a subtle artform, a good designer must be sensitive to such cascading effects. While Universe is a bit more mild mannered by comparison, it still has a commanding presence. For those documents, which need a lighter touch, little brother 45 could serve up a lighter meal. Because letter spacing requirements are so subtle, it is not surprising that Universe 55 does not handle justification well. While it can accommodate minor compromises because of its loose letter spacing, even medium compromises disrupt its poise. Consequently where as justification is not out of the question, column width should be wide and hand editing done with care to maintain that critical poise.

 

As for its family structure, that is where Universe truly shines. Prior to Universe, family members were often unplanned, popping up to satisfy a particular demand. Universe was a planned family, modularly conceived for its 21-member family to work together at optimum advantage. Universe is also a good mixer with many serif faces. Its inner spark seems to bring out the character of others. However its limitations shows up with other sans serifs. Sans serifs generally do not mix well with each other. Having similarities with virtually all sans serif designs, Universe mixes even more poorly in such gatherings so care must be exercised in pairing it with other sans serifs. The confluence between its ability to handle complexity, its perfect blending of inner confidence with outward calm, the integration of its systemic structure with its French poise, as well as its ability to handle virtually any printing conditions makes Universe a typeface that is truly universal.

Folio: (Konrad Bauer/Walter Baum 1956): Grotesque forms have been beaten against the shoreline of typography ever since their invention in 1816, but it was not until the 3rd wave that they washed away their competition. The first wave came in the 19th century when their simple construction and sturdy stroking allowed those primitive forefathers to withstand the rough printing conditions of the early “machine age” and their heavy features also allowed them to attract the rough and ready attention necessary for advertising during its infancy. Despite being denigrated for their formal crudity, they became a staple diet to the emerging marketing culture by the middle of that century, but insofar as that first wave struck during the dark hours of typography and did not sink into the typographic water table, their usefulness was washed away as the tides of early industry receded into history.

 

With the technical advancement of industrial printing, those makeshift grotesques were transformed essentially into white letters. The overwhelming success of Berthold Foundry’s Akzidenz Grotesk in 1898 caused the Stempel Foundry to release Reform Grotesk in 1903, American Type Founders to release Alternate Gothic in 1903, Franklin Gothic in 1905, and News Gothic in 1908, and the Bauer Foundry to release Venus in 1907, enabling this second wave to establish a cultural beachhead on the shores of typography. In the 1920’s and 30’s, under the ideological influence of the Bauhaus for geometric sans serifs, the grotesques retreated into a period of retrenchment, but as they sustained their beachhead, that retrenchment allowed them to gather strength until the next strike after World War II. When the tide turned again and young designers reacted against geometric sans, they reverted back to those second generation grotesques that never washed back to sea. It began with the reactivation of Akzidenz Grotesk (under its new name Standard, Venus, and Franklin Gothic, serving as a temporary measure, while the real storm gathered strength, battering ashore almost simultaneously in 1957.

 

The first to pound ashore was Folio from the Bauer Foundry of Germany, followed by Neue Haas Grotesk (better known as Helvetica) from the Haas’sche Foundry of Switzerland, Universe from the Deberny and Peignot Foundry of France, Mecator from the Typefoundry Amsterdam, and a year later by Recta from the Nebiolo Foundry of Italy. The least known of the big three was Folio because its storm-track remained too close to that of Akzidenz Grotesk. While Folio’s capitals are the size of Helvetica and Universe, its x-height, ascender height, and descender depth are virtually identical to those of Akzidenz Grotesk. As a result Folio does not have the harmonious capital to lowercase proportions that underscored the systematic regularity of Helvetica or Universe. Additionally, while Helvetica and Universe both have stronger strokes than Akzidenz Grotesk, the stroke of Folio Light is thinner. Those similarities to Akzidenz Grotesk exposed that its designers had failed to grasp that the resurgence of the second-generation grotesques were mere interim placeholders for the arrival of the real storm. Consequently its backwards look placed Folio out of synch with the post-war international business climate, and the cultural needs of the media age that followed.

 

Beyond the fact that the Bauhaus ideology was antithetical to the age of anonymity, the move away from geometric sans was also because the circular forms of geometric sans prohibited the post-war taste for tighter letter fit. While the shapes of the lowercase “o” and the roundels of Folio are more typical of grotesque forms in the medium weight, they begin to look circular in the light weight variant. More puzzling still, is that while the lowercase letters of the medium weight are not circular, their capitals “O, and Q” are more circular than their light weight counterparts. That not only means those letters retained the residual kinship to those of the geometric sans, but the inexplicable flip-flop between the capital and lowercase letters of the two weights means the lack of systematic consistency between the weights. Those inconsistencies derail Folio from the post-war drive toward modularity. The extreme thinning of the curve strokes at the joints with the stem make the roundels look almost distorted. Note also how the shoulders of the lowercase “a, c, e, h, and s” are slightly flatten, while those curves are quite steep in the “b, d, m, p, and q”. Those asymmetries add to the irregularities that make Folio seem all the less like one of the Swiss boys. Note in particular, how the idiosyncratic and almost twisted shape of its lowercase “a” does not have the structural rigor of Helvetica or Universe. Indeed, the contrast of the Medium weight is extreme enough as to skew the counter shapes to one side. Not only does Folio Light resemble Akzidenz Grotesk, but the asymmetry and irregularities of Folio Medium gives it that antique quality to make it feel akin to Franklin Gothic, the uniquely American second-generation grotesque.

 

Since Folio did not offer as much differentiation from Akzidenz Grotesk or Franklin Gothic, its storm track did not lean forward as it struck shore. While it did make an important contribution to the post-war surge back to the Neo-grotesque form, it was neither as successful in the market, nor did it have the sort of aesthetic impact as the Swiss boys. As a consequence, while Helvetica and Universe gave voice to the international storm surge that was to transform the typographic landscape, Folio is closer to the revisionist second strike of Standard and Venus prior to the real strike that washed ashore. Following so close to the storm track of Akzidenz Grotesk, Folio did not have the wind speed of the famous Helvetica/Universe tandem strike that would blow away the past necessary to provide the clearing for the foothold and reconstruction of the future. Nonetheless, not only is Folio a decent face that offers the sensitive voice capable of bridging the gap between the generations, but as the first to strike ashore, it opened the path for the new grotesque transformation to follow.