Extended Theoretical Writing

Wayfinding design often leaves out social interaction as part of its function, remaining an expression of direction, it does little to inform us of the nature of that destination. This essay will argue that if wayfinding is become an expression of community identity it must move away from its signage and architectural roots and consider social space as part of its brief. It will examine traditional methods of wayfinding, assess whether these methods are still relevant for today’s society, and question whether it can represent the cultural landscape of a city. It will then look at social media as an example of the sort of shift which traditional content delivery has undergone, before considering a series of examples that are relevant to the project. Finally, it will discuss likely directions and problems with specific regard to the project’s proposed goals. Firstly, it is important to distinguish the act of wayfinding, whereby we search for directions and orientate ourselves within a space, from the systems that are design to facilitate such an action. Per Mollerup puts it quite succinctly: “Wayshowing relates to wayfinding as writing relates to reading and as speaking relates to hearing. The purpose of wayshowing is to facilitate wayfinding.” ¹Mollerup, Per from Wayshowing: A Guide To Environmental Signage Principles and Practice (Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers, 2005) This essay will refer to the terms ‘wayshowing’ or ‘wayfinding systems’ throughout, and the two are slightly different. While wayshowing may be as simple as giving directions on the street, wayfinding systems contain a level of designed intent.

Wayfinding springs up wherever it is not clear where we should travel, and becomes particularly important in large, metropolitan environments, where there are little obvious cues as to how to navigate a space. The near magical transport of elevators and underground rail networks (where travel occurs with a disorienting lack of reference to distance, orientation or location) creates an environment that makes it is necessary for experienced travellers to be able to quickly and easily gain their bearings. As a result, wayfinding has necessarily been a static medium—physical environments do not change that often—while its function is to broadly inform as many people as possible of their surroundings. This distance between the organic space and the signed space has come about through the traditional bonds between architecture and wayshowing—both have traditionally been about making statements upon the environment, a plane of intrusion upon ‘natural’ space, and are organised and deployed by those in positions of power.

“The architect is supposed to construct a signifying space wherein form is to function as signifier is to signified; the form, in other words, is supposed to enunciate or proclaim the function.” ²Lefebvre, Henri: ‘The Production of Space’ in Architecture Theory Since 1968, ed. K. Michael Hays. (Cambridge, Mass. and London: The MIT Press, 2000) It follows, then, that wayfinding systems are as much about guidance as control—where architectural space implicitly controls our actions, wayshowing is the explicit rendering of these implicit directions. If we accept architecture as a cultural pursuit, then surely information architecture, of which wayshowing is a subset, must hold a similar position—it is the graphic representation and interpretation of data. The possibility that this sort of information delivery can come to represent a culture was central to the initial explorations for the project. While graphic memes and tropes certainly form part of the cultural landscape, and these are certainly present within sign systems, more interesting is the way that this representation of space contributes to understandings of space. Secondly, the organisation of data often sits at a remove from its graphic interpretation—that this is referred to as the ‘strategy’ is important, for it will become the “functional framework for the system, explaining how it will provide information and directions for a place and how it will address user requirements.” ³Gibson, David in The Wayfinding Handbook: Information Design for Public Places (Princeton Architectural Press, New York: 2009)

This focus on usability before aesthetics has meant that a modernist, utilitarian aesthetic tends to dominate wayfinding systems, where the legibility of the signs is considered far more important than how they look. These systems are more than signs, and it is here that architecture comes into play again—Melbourne’s city grid works remarkably well as a system for finding one’s way around with minimal signage or mapping, relying instead on the artifice of the grid as a guide. As a result, most wayfinding within the built environment of the city is a layer placed on top of a previous, pedestrian focused system. It is in this manner that wayshowing forms an integral part of the urban environment, influencing not only the way we use space but the way in which it appears as well.

Here the static nature of wayshowing comes into play once again, and flies in the face of the migrational nature of the modern metropolis. Approximately one quarter of Australia’s population was born overseas ⁴Australian Bureau of Statistics: 2008 Year Book Australia (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra, 2008) Table 7.39, and Melbourne, like the rest of the country, has seen waves of immigration. Although this is reflected in the city’s architecture, culture and lifestyle, it does not flow into the wayfinding system, which maintains the facade of pure information. This policy of reduction that appears to exist within contemporary signage—the reduction of complexity—is useful for those who wish to find their way rapidly and with minimal assistance. Andrew Kuo is an artist and designer who works with information graphics, reducing complex moments in life to the simplified aesthetic popular within wayfinding and information architecture. In particular, Reviewed Text Message Reviews ⁵Kuo, A: Reviewed Text Message Reviews (digital illustration, 2008) in Fresh Dialogue Nine: In/Visible: Graphic Data Revealed (Princeton Architectural Press, New York: 2009) turns tiny moments of joy into rational and joyless information. To borrow from Marxist thinking on politics, an an-aesthetic stance is still an aesthetic. “The city’s cold heart is thus surrounded by the ebb and flow of Mediterranean life.” ⁶Crabbe, Chris W. in Beilharz and Hogan: Sociology: Place, Time & Division (Oxford University Press: Melbourne, 2006

Contributing to this cold heart is the fact that cities have become places that are “increasingly made up of dispersed, low-density developments; the plexus is dominated by an automobile-highway system that connects but simultaneously disconnects us.” ⁷Levinson & Krizek in Planning for Place and Plexus: Metropolitan Land Useand Transport (Routledge: New York, 2008) This dominance of the automobile only serves to reinforce the natural disinclination for members of the metropolis to interact ⁸Simmel, Georg; ‘The Metropolis and Mental Life’ in The Sociology of Georg Simmel (Free Press: Glencoe, Illinois, 1950)—cars cocoon us from having to engage with the broader community, creating a hermetically sealed environment that allows a break from social interruption. While this may well apply for those who dwell in the outer suburbs, the fact is that the inner city remains a cultural centre, and yet we find the same sign systems installed in both places. This repetition does not allow for differing interpretations of the space—the generalised directions for how to travel through such a space are key to our understanding of it, and to have these directions determined before we even set foot in the space leaves little room for personal exploration.

That wayfinding systems are so resistant to change is not surprising—they are static where culture is fluid, and represent the views of those with the power to have such systems built. “Environmental signs are generally commissioned by those in power. Rulers and owners use signs to inform and regulate society. Signs—as a rule—are signs of authority.” ⁹Mollerup, Per: Wayshowing: A Guide To Environmental Signage Principles & Practice (Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers, 2005) While the standards based design of sign systems attempts to be as inclusive as possible to those with disabilities, it does reinforce the cultural majority. More accurately, in attempting to represent everybody, it ends up representing no one. Is it possible, then, for a wayfinding system to become a form of cultural identity?

Traditional wayfinding, while very good at displaying information about physical space, is very bad at displaying similar information about relatively slowly evolving events, such as sites of social interaction. And although these traditional systems rely on unchanging signs that always point in the same direction, there are examples of wayshowing that make use of live data to guide people through space. A ‘parking guidance system’ that gives dynamic feedback about where to park was recently installed in a number of car parks across Melbourne—essentially, it gives binary feedback on whether or not a space is occupied, preceded by information regarding the number of spaces available in a given row or floor. ¹⁰Indect: Parking Guidance System at Westfield Doncaster (2008) The system works well because it provides fluid information for a fluid use environment, allowing drivers to make decisions that are based on current data, and because it needs to show a very limited set of data—whether the space is empty or occupied. When presented with a larger range of options things become much more difficult. There are a couple of reasons as to why sign systems are traditionally used to display limited sets of data—the foremost being ease of use, but it is worth considering the relatively limited information palette that sign systems have to operate within. Gibson identifies only four types of signs at use within a wayfinding strategy: identification, directional, orientation and regulatory. ¹¹Gibson, David in The Wayfinding Handbook: Information Design for Public Places (Princeton Architectural Press, New York: 2009) Directional signs, such as the parking guidance system, “need to be obvious and recognisable. Message content should be simple, coordinated for easy navigation through an entire facility, and based on a specific wayfinding strategy.” ¹²Gibson, David in The Wayfinding Handbook: Information Design for Public Places (Princeton Architectural Press, New York: 2009) Given the limitations faced by a stationary sign system, they are best used for directions and orientation in static environments. However, the contemporary city is increasingly fluid not only in structure but in use, where the cultural value of various sites rapidly changes across user groups and through time. A museum that may be relevant one day is reduced to the status of outsider, with the zeitgeist having moved on to another gallery, bar or venue, while a particular cultural or sub-cultural group may retain its peculiar qualities as it moves from one area to another. The installed nature of sign systems—particularly those that identify, orientate or direct—means that they cannot adjust as quickly as the city itself is changing. As previously mentioned, this is not necessarily problematic for the directional action of wayfinding. Architectural spaces do not change as rapidly as social spaces do, and so it only becomes challenging for a socially focused wayshowing system.

There are, of course, numerous examples of systems that attempt to engage with the cultural aspects of cities and society. Legible London is a key example, whereby pedestrians are shown surrounding attractions and how to get there. ¹³AIG London: Legible London: A Wayfinding Study (London: AIG, 2006) The problem with this method is that it falls into the same tropes as other sign systems by dictating to the public what is and what isn’t culturally relevant, neither can it be easily updated should these cultural centres change. The Deck of Secrets ¹⁴Matthews, Michelle, et al: Deck Of Secrets Series (Melbourne: Shopping Secrets, 2003–) faces a similar problem, although its status as a publication makes it a little easier to update. This dictation, or direction, doesn’t work, not just because of fears that certain cultural activities may be privileged over others, but also because people have different tastes—most of what appears within the guides appeals only to certain aspects of the community. When you assert that you are a voice of that community, it follows that there should be an avenue for that same community to provide feedback on the information contained within the system. Interactive media provides an avenue for just such a dialogue. Google Maps ¹⁵Rasmussen, L & Rasmussen, J: Google Maps (Google: Silicon Valley, 2005) via http://maps.google.com has developed from a relatively simple digital atlas into an interactive environment, where users can post reviews, recommendations, photos and videos that are then integrated into the maps. While this service is becoming increasingly mobile, full functionality still requires a desktop computer, meaning that the information is placed at a remove from the location. Following a similar path are Foursquare, ¹⁶Crowley, D and Selvadurai, N: Foursquare (Foursquare: New York, 2009) via http://www.foursquare.com Gowalla ¹⁷Alamofire: Gowalla (Alamofire: Austin, Texas, 2007) via http://www.gowalla.com and Yelp!, which attempt to leverage social media to build a network of recommended cultural pursuits. These are location based and digitally delivered services—they use the GPS abilities of modern smartphones to pull a user’s location and then provide them with not only surrounding points of interest, as with Google Maps, but allow them to add to, edit and contribute to those points in real-time. On top of that, these systems allow the user to see what other users are doing, and whether any of their close contacts are nearby. This layer of social information is useful in assisting people to find new things to do, and shows it to them in a geographically relevant manner. However, use of the service is restricted to those who have a GPS enabled smartphone that can access the application, and thus presents an expensive barrier to entry for many people. Also, given recent concerns over the way social media companies, in particular Facebook, are handling the private data of their users, there may be reservations about handing over such personal data to a third party. Also worth noting is the iFind Kiosk ¹⁸Abuzz: iFind Kiosk (installation, various sizes/locations, 2009) system—essentially an interactive directory board that places a map of the surrounding area on a large touch screen, and allows users to interact with it. The kiosk then shows the user’s preferred destination and the best route for them to follow. While the potential for this system to be used to show live updated data on the surrounding cultural landscape is huge, at this stage it has largely been deployed in shopping centres. Additionally, the system as it currently stands requires users to know exactly what they are searching for, and does not truly facilitate the act of discovery.

If a wayfinding system is to become part of, or representative of, a city’s cultural identity, then it is worth looking at the ideas behind relational aesthetics. Part of the functionality of a socially based system would come from the way people interact, rather than the way they move. May I Have Your Attention Please ¹⁹Bark Design: May I Have Your Attention Please (exhibition, London, 2009) started as a collection of phrases spoken in public throughout the United Kingdom—these phrases were then turned into an exhibition that constantly updated and changed, reflecting the nature of public discourse. The designers chose to use the visual language of signage to reduce the complexities of human language and discussion to simple ‘verbal bites’. “Words in private tend to be emotional, subjective, expressive and candid. In contrast, when we are in a public space, most people filter, subdue and moderate language, we become more objective.” ²⁰Bark Design: May I have Your Attention Please (Bark Design: London: 2009) The way people interact in public space is vastly different to private actions—this is important when considering wayfinding and relational aesthetics because of the sway public space holds over the nature of installed signage. If we consider sign systems as a form of discourse and interaction between architecture (and therefore architect), wayshowing (and therefore wayshowing designer) and the public, then the reasons behind the directive language in sign systems become clear. Although interactivity in sign systems holds an ability for a two way discourse—a one-to-many broadcast system, whereby you can select the content you wish to engage with—socially based systems offer a multi-form discourse. A many-to-many system has obvious advantages in increased interaction and relational use. Sensis attempted to use social interaction, and an air of exclusivity, to drum up business for the Yellow Pages, by creating a campaign, and restaurant, called Hidden Pizza. Pamphlets were sent out to houses in the area around the restaurant, located just of Brunswick St, in Fitzroy, that simply stated “Free Pizza... if you can find our restaurant” and to “look us up the way you would any other business.” ²¹Sensis: Free Pizza Pamphlet (2009) While comparisons to Tiravanija’s Untitled (Free) ²²Tiravanija, R: Untitled (Free) (installation, 303 Gallery, New York, 1992) are inevitable, here the use of free food is more about creating a brand image, about getting people to use a particular service, and less about fostering positive interactions. And while there were undoubtedly some positive interactions, the whole enterprise is stamped with the Yellow Pages branding, meaning that any sense of community identity that could be created from such an event is overshadowed by the brand’s message. In order to participate, the event forced people to forego already established wayfinding systems—the concept is based on its refusal to advertise its location within these systems. There are also perceived barriers to entry with regards to events such as these—examination of the video produced regarding the restaurant reveals that it is largely young, relatively affluent people that attended, and yet one would imagine that the prospect of a free meal would have been quite enticing to the homeless and disadvantaged. This shows that only those with access to the technology required to find the event (essentially, a home, a phone and an internet connection) were able to do so. Wayshowing typically operates as a barrier-free medium—that is, the only thing required to make use of the system is to be able to understand it. What the Free Pizza example indicates quite strongly is that wayshowing is not tied to any one medium—unlike painting or sculpture, the best wayfinding system is one that enables the user to find their way most easily. This post-medium condition ²³Although to refer to it as such is a little inaccurate, for, as mentioned, wayshowing has never been tied to one specific medium. enables the use of a wide variety of solutions to any given wayfinding problem—indeed, almost any element in the environment can, and has been, used for the purposes of wayfinding. What is interesting, however, is that the interaction between users and the system has not been used to facilitate greater interaction between people, and probably goes to the core of wayfinding philosophy. Often systems are developed so that people can find their own way, with minimal assistance from staff or volunteers. A communally focused piece of wayshowing should break from this and encourage users to interact with the people around them. “I’m not really concerned with accuracy. Of course, it’s important to fall back on accurate data, but what interests me most is the storytelling.” ²⁴Kuo, A in Fresh Dialogue Nine: Graphic Data Revealed

This project, Found, attempts to bridge the divide between wayfinding systems and cultural networks. That is to say, it attempts to view wayfinding systems as a form of community identity, where that identity is created by the interactions of people in various social groups and within a particular geographic area. The idea is that people would contribute their own recommendations for social and cultural activities within a given area, which would then be applied in a system around the project’s target site. Such a system would bypass some of the previously mentioned issues with contemporary wayfinding solutions—it is democratic, private and provides relevant information at the site where it is needed. It is also a direct expression of the community’s identity. There are, of course, problems with this approach. Firstly, wayfinding and sign systems exist for those who cannot find their way, and so a socially focused system would be of little use to, say, someone in desperate need of health care. A socially based, or crowd-sourced, system such as this would not be traditional wayfinding—it is a supplementary layer that sits on top of the already installed systems that exist within the metropolitan environment. In attempting to create such a system, and particularly within the limited amount of time available in an honours degree, there are a number of restrictions that must be placed upon the project.

One of these considerations was the geographical area that was to be used for the system, for which two main sites were considered. The site had to be relatively well populated to ensure a broad range of cultural pursuits, but small enough that it was going to be relatively easy to examine. For this reason, several sites on Melbourne’s inner city fringe were rejected—while suburbs such as St. Kilda, Richmond and Brunswick are cultural centres in their own right, there was concern that these environments are not used often enough for a truly broad data set to be built. Thus, the inner city, from Collins Street to Little Bourke Street across and then from Spring Street to Spencer Street, was chosen as the prospective site for the wayfinding system. There is no reason that such a system, if successful, could not be expanded to include Melbourne’s other suburbs, and the system should be designed in such a way as to take this expansion into account. Allowing anyone to update the information provided removes concerns that such a system would privledge those who dwell in the inner city, which is why an adaptable system that does not rely on expensive installations or kiosks is necessary. The downfall of such a system would be that people often don't understand the best way to navigate built, complex environments—while it may be nice to think that the broader population should become deeply involved in the wayshowing systems of their city, there is little chance of that happening.

At this stage, the system seeks to find a fine balance between control of information design, which has been a speciality of wayshowing, and an 'open source' style system that allows anyone to contribute to the information displayed. The solution—again, this is only a proposal—would involve taking recommendations for locations from the general public and designing those in a site specific manner. This could involve an up-dateable directory of information, small directional signs, postcards to be carried by users. Ultimately, a key part of the system will be the method of collecting data from the public, for which a simple website is a perfect solution. The directory could display the top ten recommended destinations for Summer 2010, Spring 2011, etc. Such a system allows me to find that balance between open source and control, while also granting the ability to have it be updated regularly. Additionally, there is a link here between the way the system works, with regular, community led updates, and the way communal identity shifts and changes over time. The question remains as to whether the posters, stickers and postcards should be left in their environments or removed at the end of the period—a case can be made for leaving evidence of the community's preferences over time, but there is a danger of simply increasing the visual clutter already present within the inner city.

As it currently stands, wayshowing is an expression of communal identity only in the fact that it appears within the community. Its static nature, and focus on providing pure information, means that there is little interaction between users and the wayfinding solution—it is a form of dictation and proclamation. While there have been a number of different approaches to providing users with an intimate experience, reflective of both their surroundings and their cultural activities, there has, as yet, been no solution that accurately reflects all aspects of these. If we add to this the minimalist aesthetic that flows through much of information design, there is little room left for individual cultural expression. And yet, there is potential for a wayfinding system to remove perceived barriers to entry for cultural pursuits and, in so doing, create a more closely knit communal identity. To do so, however, it must move beyond traditional wayfinding methods and embrace community interaction, and actively involve those who traditionally sit outside of wayfinding and information design.