Part One can be viewed here.
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. 1Indect: 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. 2Gibson, 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.” 3Gibson, 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. 4AIG 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 5Matthews, 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 6Rasmussen, 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, 7Crowley, D and Selvadurai, N: Foursquare (Foursquare: New York, 2009) via http://www.foursquare.com Gowalla 6Alamofire: 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 9Abuzz: 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 10Bark 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.” 11Bark 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.” 12Sensis: Free Pizza Pamphlet (2009) While comparisons to Tiravanija’s Untitled (Free) 13Tiravanija, 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 14Although 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.” 15Kuo, A in Fresh Dialogue Nine: Graphic Data Revealed
In the next, and final instalment (found here), I will detail how I hope to address some of the concerns raised in the previous two entries.
