Futura is often seen as the quintessential Bauhaus typeface and though its seemingly constructivist letterforms appear to suggest so, its author, Paul Renner was a not a Bauhaus designer. Instead his independence of the movement allows the typeface (and reactions to it) to be seen as a sort of zeitgeist, representing the german political climate, constructivism and the machine age. Renner was, on the other hand, a member of the Deutsche Werkbund, a group dedicated to encouraging “good” design
Charles C Leonard points out that “Social, technological, and economic shifts are paralleled in the forms of visual expression.”, furthering this by explaining that “Two forces drive creation of a new form of public script: developments in the technology used to create the script and governing attitudes at the time of its creation.” According to Charles C Leonard, The aim of Futura was to combine geometric forms with essential European scripts. Renner was by no means the first typographer to attempt this during the period, so why did he succeed where others failed?
In 1923, Herbert Bayer began experimental work on Universal. This typeface was another attempt to redefine modern typography, with the construction of geometric forms, and was intended to be the arch-typeface of the Bauhaus.
Since it was never published as a metal typeface, it is impossible to predict exactly how successful Universal would have been in achieving its goal. The early drafts of Futura (which have since been published as the Architype Renner typeface) have a very similar feel to Universal in their extremely strict geometric forms. The two typefaces were both attempts at a new geometric vision for the future of Typography, yet when looked into the details there are a few things that Futura possessed but Universal lacked, and this may be why one remained a mere experiment, and the other took off and became “the most enduring typographic act of its time”
The first of these is the lack of uppercase letters in Universal. In his Graphic Design: A New History, Eskilson wrote about how this was extremely unpopular with German conservatives, as the rules of capitalisation in the German orthography made capital letters particularly important. In an increasingly conservative Germany, this proved to be problematic – Futura had no such problem. Futura may have benefitted too from Renner’s independence from the Bauhaus, as the school and movement was becoming increasingly unpopular, due to its socialist leanings, and its untraditional teaching methods.
The key difference between Futura and its conceptual competitors is that Renner realised, in order for the typeface to work in practise, these rules would have to be bargained with. As Eskilson writes “Renner recognised that the most pure geometric forms neither appeared as beautiful as individual shapes, nor connected fluidly with one another” Futura compromised on the rigid geometric strokes and adding more humanist stresses – subtle variations in stroke weight that imitate the movements of a human hand holding a pen.
Charles C Leonard claims Futura must be seen as a product of Weimar Germany, stating; it is “emblematic of promise and failure”. The republic had ambitious dreams that ultimately were crushed by the rise of Nazism. This is very similar to the story of Futura, but instead of fading into obscurity when the Nazi’s took power and repopularised blackletter and neoclassical architecture, the typeface found its true success abroad. Charles C Leonard writes; “For a period of Futura’s development, those forms included both German and Latin features. Ultimately, Futura achieved success outside of Germany by taking on more roman characteristics and abandoning its ‘German’ forms. Renner’s application of a formalist aesthetic to the design of anationalist letterforms separates him from both the German functionalist and English historicist schools prevalent in 1920s Europe.” In other words, Futura was designed to revolutionise German type with its geometric approach, but domestic circumstances meant it had to do it from a truly international standpoint, independent of subtle characteristics that would make it appear to lean on the history of a particular country’s typography. A pastiche of gothic style is clearly visible in some of the original sketches for Futura, but even more evident is the switch to a more roman style as development progressed.