Unlike sound, symbols and signage can be easily seen throughout buildings. Usually this is due to building regulations forcing designers to implement signs such as ‘Fire Exits’ and ‘No Entry’ to make the users easily aware of health and safety measures. Without these being implemented in an obvious manner the user could be exposed to more dangerous situations. In some cases, even advertisement signage has to abide by regulations or at a minimum be in a ‘safe condition’ (Garrett and Portal, 2015). This can be seen in Lululemon Spitialfields by Bisset Adams where traditional hanging board signage (See Figure 17) had to be passed through planning permission to connect the traditional market place of the area (See Figure 18) and their dimensions. However, most of these elements are very obvious, immediately telling the user to do something for their own well-being. Symbols explored on a deeper unseen persuasive sense invites users to adapt their human behaviour subtly.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

When creating symbols and signs within the actual architecture ‘modern architects abandoned a tradition of iconology’ (Venturi et al., 1977c, p. 7) often opting for a minimalistic approach as seen in Figure 19. In comparison to this the 19th Century saw the use of art and ornament in a space (See Figure 20) to enhance the architecture and the messages it was trying to convey (Venturi et al., 1977c, p. 7). The only issue with this concept is as times change these meanings may be perceived differently.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

​

​

​

​

 

This issue combined with other constraints such as overall brand presence means symbolism interaction with architecture becomes hugely important in manipulation of the user. For instance, the attraction of a casino along the Las Vegas strip is dependant of typography signs and the symbolism alongside them. Car parks are usually situated at the front of the stores/casinos enabling users to view the whole of the architecture façade from the street as seen in Figure 21 (compared to Figure 22). In addition to this the idea of ‘articulation over ornament’ (Venturi et al., 1977c, p. 148) allows the intricate, often ‘oasis’ structure within a hostile context to be read by the user easily, often enticing them towards the building.

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

By exposing users in leisure/retail settings to these methods of symbolism it enforces a corporate image which in turn adds to their cognitive memory, encouraging a specific opinion, often attracting customers towards said symbol (Wallin Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998).    

 

Overall architects aim to integrate signs and symbols as a design element as the design elements themselves interact to become directional, informative symbols acting as ‘bold communication rather than one of subtle expression.’ (Venturi et al., 1977d, p. 9). Therefore, as a whole, symbols can be created through manipulating the users’ perception of other architectural elements, this is how signs become an integrated persuasion rather than an obvious branded advert changing human behaviour.