Why Papyrus Should be Left in the Past
Whilst Comic Sans may be the original font meme, when it comes to the internet’s opinion on graphic design there has been a new typeface which has been subject to the ridicule it deserves… Papyrus.
This tacky, overused and dated typeface is the thorn among a whole line of roses on many high streets up and down the country. It’s found in the most bizarre places; cafe menus, building contractors, mortgage companies — all places you wouldn’t expect to want their identity to be ancient Egyptian. Even when you think you’re free at home, a leaflet from the local arts and crafts group comes through your door, tainted all over with Papyrus.
Whilst many have similar feelings for Comic Sans, I’d like to make the case for its defence. Yes it may seem unprofessional to use but, in the right setting, it is a perfectly legitimate design decision — so long as its a slide for a primary school spelling class. It is a well thought out and well-designed typeface which is very effective at making text easier to read for people with dyslexia. However, it’s due to this constant use in classrooms that it has developed a perception as being only suitable for this setting.
A shining example of how using a typeface in the wrong context can go terribly wrong and lose your message, is the presentation of the Higg’s Bosun Particle by CERN in 2012. This use of Comic Sans immediately caused distraction from an incredible scientific discovery and partially ruined the moment these scientists had been working for years towards. It’s a valuable lesson on looking at the connotations of the typeface you choose.
Papyrus was designed by Chris Costello in 1982, straight out of design school. It was whilst studying bibles he came up for the idea of a typeface which would’ve been used around the time and place of the birth of Jesus. He came up with the original all caps version in just four days, before sending it off to various foundries and being rejected by all but one. After spending a year developing it into a full typeface, he sold it to Letracet for the equivalent of $2,500 today. You’d think if he’d known it’d be on every computer in the world in the future, he would’ve asked for a bit more.
Perhaps the most famous use of the typeface, when it’s not found on some greasy spoon’s menu, is the logo for James Cameron’s blockbuster ‘Avatar’. The director was so happy with the choice that, bizarrely, he chose to use it for the subtitles of the film as well. This was a bold and misguided choice as it was turned the subtitles of the film into a massive distraction instead of an enhancement. The design’s raggedy edges, which give it its trademark texture, and awkwardly small x-height makes it incredibly difficult to read at a glance, especially on different coloured backgrounds — not ideal for filmmaking. Whilst the logo is technically a custom typeface, it is clearly heavily based on Papyrus. This slight modification of limiting the textures and elongating some of the letters was not enough to separate it from the typeface, at all.
What is really upsetting about this choice of typeface as the star of ‘Avatar’, apart from the legibility issues, is the associations it already has with the rest of the world. This was a groundbreaking blockbuster with a massive budget, but Papyrus has a reputation for being on poor quality pieces of design with a very low budget. Definitely not the kind of message you want to send out to the target audience of the most heavily anticipated films of the time.
The use of the typeface in ‘Avatar’ is so ridiculed that SNL did one of their best sketches about it. In fact, it was so widely shared and laughed about, there are rumours that it was the final straw to make ‘Avatar’ change their logo ahead of the upcoming sequels. Whatever the reason, good riddance. The only appropriate place you’re going to find this typeface is a child’s tea-stained report on ancient Egypt.
But what would happen if you were to only give people access to the “good” typefaces on their standard computer operating system? Would the good ones suddenly become the terrible ones? Who gets to decide what makes a typeface good enough to make this exclusive list? And is it fair that taking away these fun and — for lack of a better word — expressive typefaces could limit the creativity of someone who isn’t a designer with access to a much wider variety of choices? Ultimately it is important to let people have a wide variety of typefaces to use at their leisure. By tactically limiting range of typefaces in the basic pack of fonts, you could be discouraging someone from perusing their love for graphic design. After all, who can forget using Word Art for the first time?
Choosing to applaud Comic Sans yet mock Papyrus may seem a bit hypocritical, given their similar reputations, but hear me out. Comic Sans has a very clear job which it is doing very well. It’s a widely accessible typeface which contributes to the learning of others who may have otherwise struggled. Yes, it is misused, and yes it isn’t the sexiest of the default typefaces available, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t good. Papyrus, on the other hand, has all of the downsides of Comic Sans but none of its redeeming qualities. It is only appropriate for INCREDIBLY FEW occasions, making the decision to make it a standard font simply insane.
All typefaces do have a time and a place to be used, but for the sake of everyone’s eyes, Papyrus should not be used again for a very long time.
Word Count : 963
