by Monsieur Jean — coiffeur
During one of this sessions it occured to me that throughout the many times that Mr. Mecánico wrote about the loss of diversity and the dangers of iconization, his view and interpretation of what he sees are strongly skewed towards collections. In my opinion there is more below the surface.
I will prove my point first with observations about the hierarchy and dresscode on Children's Crossing signs, and then with a discussion about iconization.
Sorry for the emancipation movement, but their strategies for equal rights for women always show the same fatal flaw. They never seem to realize that their message is overruled (or at least diluted) by some everyday traffic signs.
The message is radiated loud and clear every few steps on many places! Disguised as an innocent roadsign: the secret agenda of the male part of humanity. The approach is extremely clever: the most appropriate placing is near schools: imprinting starts early in life and is repeated every day.
My second discovery is about iconization.
Many countries drop the sweet old-fashioned road-signs for bleak match-stick things (f.e. Armenia, Canada or France). I wonder why. Let's have a look at some possible reasons.
+ Improve visibility: lower chance of missing the sign.
A good colour choice guarantees that the sign can be seen from far enough away, even in sub-optimal conditions. I don't see why the change can't be restricted to colours only. Worse: from a distance the match-sticks all look the same.
+ Improve world-wide recognition by setting standards.
The samples show no trend towards unification. We see triangles, diamonds, pentagons, circles in blue-white, yellow-black, white–black all with different children lacking a face.
None of the possible reasons survives our scrutinity.
We must open our eyes for reality: modern signs are meant to impregnate us with the thought that we are un-people, nobodies, numbers, and must behave accordingly like docile herd-animals. The alternative conclusion is that the modern design unintentionaly emits the secret thoughts of our governments about the people they are supposed to serve. The difference is the lack of malice.
I dislike both. I dislike the vanilla-sation of the world. And so, to my own surprise, I arrive at the same conclusion as Mr. Mecánico.