It sounds a trivial concept: that a typeface could satisfy every context and every demand, but isn't it an appealing one? If such a typeface was devised we could stop the endless search for new forms and dispose of the rubbish piled up by decades of constant tinkering and invention. Instead, we could settle happily upon a purer communication, unencumbered by the problems of form; a utopia of type so farfetched that it would be governed, it would seem, by the hand of God himself.

 

This search for the ideal found its home in the German Grotesk. Simple and pure, the sans-serif was seen as the building block of the future. It was more suited to machine production than serif typefaces, it worked in print and, later, digitally – in looking for a universal form, the sans-serif was the only obvious foundation. For the past century we have seen a staggering number of sans-serif typefaces appear, some good and some bad, some attempting to be universal and many not, it really is a jungle out there. And yet, no matter where you go, the shadow of Helvetica looms over them all.

 

It is not hyperbole to suggest that Helvetica is the most over-worked and over-used typeface of the modern era. And, more than being an aspect of Modernism, it has become the very essence of Modernism itself. It’s like a flat pack typeface: unpack it, put it near some negative space, give it a shuffle, and voila! Instant Modernism. Give yourself a pat on the back, you're Modernist now.

 

But is Helvetica universal, really? Supporters would say yes. It is everywhere, after all, “it seems like air” (Beirut, 2007). But has the air gotten so thick that it's choking us? The question here is, does ubiquity beget universality as it seems to, or is Helvetica just treading the treacherous line between universality and globalisation?

 

Forty-five years after Helvetica’s initial development Linotype released its update “Helvetica World”. Fancy title aside, the release was not without merit. It was designed to support a large number of language and writing systems from around the world, and though it lacked the range of weights of the original that is an admirable step towards universality. However, looking over the list of Helvetica clones and updates (and there are a lot) one is moved to think: do we really need another Helvetica, and do we really need a universal typeface?

 

The question is this: when Helvetica is no longer the revolutionary product of Modernism but a lazy solution to the brief "make it look clean and modern!" can it really be regarded as useful – in a world after Modernism, can Modernist typefaces still carry their own weight? In a post-modern world, can there be a universal typeface?