Paranoia or poor planning?
The new U.S.-Canada border crossing station at Massena, NY, as seen from the Canadian side.
Photo by Michael Moran.
via fastcompany.com
In a move that makes designers cringe, the Customs and Border Protection Agency is dismantling a stunning piece of design: 21 ft tall letters adorning the entry to the United States in Massena, NY. Arguing that this sign could serve as a giant target for terrorists I'd retort: have you heard of Google Earth? This example reiterates that in order for a design solution to be successful, there needs to be a comprehensive understanding of the problem reached by all invested parties. Of course, no solution is perfect, and inevitably some stakeholder always gets overlooked. So how do we avoid this pitfall? When designing public art in an age of participation and paranoia, flexibility is absolutely essential. I wonder, had this sign been designed with lights and/or projections, would it have been able to adapt according to the desires of the Border Control? What if the letterforms change based on the viewer's positioning, camouflaging themselves from any angle other than that of an individual crossing the border? Perhaps the signage could be used to welcomed each individual by name as they passed through, thus deterring illegitimate activity. I wonder what other ideas that exhibit flexibility and adaptation could have allowed the design to pass through customs?
