5 April, 2010
Explicit prohibition as the evidence of the prohibited act itself
It is amusing how a sign prohibiting a certain behaviour essentially becomes an effective indicator of the fact that the prohibited behaviour exists.
In this case, the indication was more prominent than other signs such as the usual “No smoking” sign as I have never seen the same sign on trains in Japan or in the UK. They don’t exist simply because people do not do it, thus there is no need to put up the sign.
As the world gets more globalised, more people with different types of and/or tendency of different (negative) behaviours live in a given society, how would such uncounsicous assumptions be challenged at a design phase? And its influence of the public space design?