The Bane of My Existence: Comic Sans

(I’m sorry, April. It has to be done.)

If you’ve ever held a conversation with me for any length of time, then you probably know that I absolutely despise the (unfortunately) popular typeface, Comic Sans. The font, originally developed for Microsoft, has gotten a lot of flack over the past few...oh, I don’t know...decades from graphic designers and typographers. However, Comic Sans has also gained some apologists in recent years. So, since my project involves web design (and typography), I thought it would be appropriate to settle the debate as objectively as possible (for the most part…). I’ll start with Comic Sans’s origin story:

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.

Comic Sans was designed by Vincent Connare in 1994, as commissioned by Melinda Gates of Microsoft. They needed a new typeface for the program manager at the time, Microsoft Bob, a “user-friendly” interface in the early days of Windows. In this program, a pixelated dog named Rover and other characters help the user navigate their newfangled computer through speech bubbles (written in Times New Roman). Connare wanted to make the script as “friendly” as possible, hence its childlike appearance.

In fact, at one point, the Euro character had an eye in Comic Sans. It was eventually removed because the EU threatened to sue Microsoft over it.

Ironically, Comic Sans was never used in the final version of MS Bob, but it was turned into a default font in future Microsoft products, such as MS Word. Today, it is widely regarded as the worst font in the history of the digital age.

But why? For the most part, it is looked down upon because of its ubiquity in inappropriate applications, typographical flaws, and for just being really ugly.

#1: Inappropriate Use of Comic Sans

I mean really...

If you cringe at the sight of Comic Sans like I do, then you know that you see it everywhere, from public services to tombstones. Keep in mind that the font was originally designed for a talking dog...there’s no reason for you to use it on your resume, much less in front of your country’s embassy.

Comic Sans isn’t a universal font. However, there are some appropriate applications for it (*gasp*):

• It’s generally accepted that you can use Comic Sans when it is meant to be read by children under 11 years of age.
• Many dyslexics find that Comic Sans is much easier to read than other fonts (albeit there are many fonts that are designed specifically for dyslexics that look a lot better, aesthetically).
• Sarcasm.

#2: Typographical Flaws:

Here’s the objective part I was talking about. If you look at Comic Sans through the eyes of a graphic designer, you would instantly see the problems with it. For the purpose of demonstrating these problems, I will be comparing Comic Sans to Helvetica. *Keep in mind that Comic Sans has gained popularity because it looks like 'handwriting'.*

Modulation is when the size of the stroke changes in the same stroke (so, the line thins out or thickens and then returns to normal). Both Comic Sans and Helvetica have unmodulated strokes (the stroke size doesn’t change). Other, more classic looking fonts, like Garamond, are modulated; this comes from the days when books were handwritten. Pens were flat-tipped, so the stroke would change slightly when they made a curve, like in an ‘S’ or ‘C’.

Here’s the problem, though. When you look at Comic Sans vs Helvetica:

They still look different. In the letter ‘n’, the stroke should get a little thinner when the curved shoulder meets the stem. Helvetica does this. Comic Sans does not. This gives the font weight that makes for that iconic clunkiness. So much for a handwritten font.

Then, there’s kerning.

Kerning is the space between two letters. There are several instances where the spacing is ‘off’ in Comic Sans, as shown above. This is just how the kerning tables are set (parameters programmed into the font that make the spacing even between any two letters), and sure you can fix them manually, if you want. But there’s a reason fonts have kerning tables: to make the font look pleasing and uncluttered. Due to the long crossbar on the ‘f’, it would collide with the ‘o’, ruining the spacing and thus defeating the purpose.

And that isn't even all of it.

tl;dr: Comic Sans is not similar to handwriting, and its programming does not make for a pleasant appearance, therefore, it is not a well-designed font.

#3: It’s Ugly:

Let’s face it. Comic Sans isn’t the most attractive font out there. When you compare it to fonts like Helvetica, Trebuchet, Georgia, or even Century Gothic, there’s no competition.

That’s fine. But if you want a friendly font, there are plenty of better alternatives to choose from, and most of them look like actual handwriting.

A lot of people think that Comic Sans is going to make a triumphant comeback, but I’ve put aside my bias and looked at this objectively (...you know, for the most part…) and it probably won’t happen. Comic Sans will just have to be the butt of every design joke for many years to come.

And don’t even get me started on Papyrus.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Sans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUCcObwIsOs

http://kadavy.net/blog/posts/why-you-hate-comic-sans/