Urban Semiotics in Bucharest City Center Through the Analysis of Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs

Abstract

The present research focuses on buildings’ names and commercial signs analysis as an important component of Bucharest city center semiotics in relation to place identity. Insufficient studies have focused on the direct relationship between commercial signs and place identity, and no scientific approaches in this sense have been identified at Bucharest level. The buildings’ names and commercial signs used as case studies are from the second part of the 19th century until the present. The profound economic and social changes that have taken place in Bucharest during more than 150 years are reflected in the findings. Relying on a complex methodology, a typology framing the case studies identified in the field highlights situations that are not necessarily in accord with the passage of time, but rather with certain city planning decisions and in relation to space use. The novelty of this paper lies in the investigation of some components of Bucharest city center that tend to be forgotten, providing in the end information in relation to their degree of appreciation and therefore preservation, or on the contrary, abandonment and loss. In this complex approach, the role of territorial actors involved in actions such as inventory, framing, and finding preservation solutions is discussed.

1. Introduction

Urban communication studies is an expanding field of research focused on uncovering the patterns of human interaction within urban context [1]. All cities are filled with symbols, signs, and various educational and informational graphic elements, which play a crucial role in creating order and supporting managers and officials in implementing rules and regulations [2]. Outdoor advertising synchronizes urban routines, such as travel and work, with the commercial cycles of product innovation, promotion, and the evolving life cycle of commodities. This forms an urban commodity rhythm that significantly shapes how people experience the city, establishing new connections between commodities and the movement of people within urban spaces [3].

Advertising, a key communication tool for introducing products to the public, plays a significant role in shaping and even transforming the lifestyles of urban populations [4,5,6] and acts as a mirror of society, reflecting its values, norms, and preferences [7]. Advertising discourse is a form of communication that embodies an ideology, legitimizing social relationships both directly and indirectly [8]. The effectiveness of this discourse relies on the interplay of symbolic, material, and technological media [1].

Companies’ signs are analyzed in the scientific literature in a multifaceted approach. Many researches are focused on the commercial signs’ meanings [9], highlight the identity of commercial signs and the elements that ultimately give them this identity from different points of view—plastic, iconic, verbal or orthographic aspects [10]—or perceive the commercial signs as an act of communication and emphasize the knowledge, history, and representations of the interlocutor [11], for which advanced qualitative research is needed. Marking is a form of identity materialization, both individual and collective [12]. The identity function of a sign is created by its various components mixed together in the same graphic space, a mark of a place and at the same time an indicator of a strong specificity that influences its reading [10].

The objectives of the present paper are not related to the analysis of the aspects mentioned above. Although the presentation of each component of the visible part of the commercial sign is not central in our paper, they play a significant role in geographical research in relation to place identity or place attachment. Signs create a certain cultural and social complicity between the merchant and the passer-by [11], and this may be considered participation, along with other components of the urban space in a place’s identity construction, because the socio-economic system is the critical component of space and the semiotic component creates the place [13,14].

Spatial identity is a multidimensional process, very complex to construct [15], and perceived in relation to space perception and representations [16,17]: to the past, as a place of memory [18] or as a place of condensation, both social and territorial [19].

Semiotic analyses allow us to understand how people perceive places and the symbols within them, and are often used in interpreting the meanings of place in space design [20]. Essentially, geographical semiotics includes both concrete and abstract symbols, as well as how people interpret and perceive these symbols, making this field of research vast and diverse [21]. The semiotic landscape of an urban area, meaning “any (public) space with visible inscriptions made through deliberate human intervention and meaning-making” [22], includes various forms of semiotic expression, such as visual images and visual features of written language. Visual semiotics manifest through images (signs, graphics, texts, photographs, paintings, and all possible combinations thereof) created as significant ensembles for visual interpretation [23].

Urban space semiotics, based on signs and symbols in terms of perceiving, sensing, and inventing the city [24], or urban semiotics [25] is the study of meanings in urban areas generated by signs, symbols, and their social connotations [26]. Signs are both commercial and non-commercial [27]. The city may be seen as a sum of places and spaces, and the places are associated with unchanging and visual markers. Among different markers, commemorative landmarks or monuments, stores also represent symbols [11] through signs [28]. Commercial messages on shop signs, cafés, and galleries dominate this semiotic landscape, representing expressions that encompass values and identities and are linked to various activities [29]. Consequently, besides architecture being perceived as a system of signs [30], different components of the city center landscape and territorial equipment, including from the category of economic activities carried out, may be considered signs with different identity values, and all uses give rise to their own signs and symbols [31].

The transition from the communist to the capitalist system for Eastern and Central Europe contributed to the transformation of the urban visual environment, commercial signs, and buildings’ façades [32]. Also, the heritage of an urban area is closely linked to the existence of a geographical space with its own characteristics and is the basis of the feeling of collective identity and historical continuity [33], its interpretation being, above all, a sensitive process that has its source in the identity and emotion of the place [34,35].

The present study analyzes the relationships with the past and the components of Bucharest city center that construct contemporary urban semiotics through commercial signs and buildings’ names, and hence not evaluating directly the signs’ impact on place attachment, i.e., the cognitive–emotional connection of people to places. Luminous signs (luminous volumetric letters, luminous boxes, LED neon lights, luminous totems) and non-illuminated advertisements (volumetric letters, non-illuminated boxes, panels) are the main forms in which companies’ signs are made [36]. Beyond their pure aesthetic importance in the urban landscape, similar to other components, commercial signs can transmit a series of information related to place identity and indirectly to urban image.

The components of identity involved in commercial signs are to be found in the choice of the name itself, but also in the visible part of the sign: “unlike the advertising poster, which is more repetitive, the characteristic of the commercial sign is by nature to appear unique, to attract by displaying its uniqueness, and by the same token its identity” [10].

The research hypotheses of the present study are the following:

• Hypothesis 1 (H1)—The role of buildings’ names in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is important.
• Hypothesis 2 (H2)—The role of buildings’ commercial signs in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is important.
• Hypothesis 3 (H3)—The role of buildings’ names in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is indifferent.
• Hypothesis 4 (H4)—The role of buildings’ commercial signs in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is indifferent.
• Hypothesis 5 (H5)—The role of buildings’ names in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is not at all important.
• Hypothesis 6 (H6)—The role of buildings’ commercial signs in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is not at all important.

2. Bucharest Place Identity Construct: General Context and Cultural Influences

Bucharest place identity is appreciated in this research based on socio-economic and political changes that extend in particular over the second part of the 19th century until the present. The adoption of a certain architectural style is a tributary to a political–ideological model that characterizes a certain historical period. At the same time, it is also the result of the dynamics of the ethnic structure of the urban population, which in turn is also subordinated to political–ideological factors, with a decisive role in filtering migration flows [37].

In Bucharest, the modern and contemporary periods were deeply influenced by the French cultural model, especially in the second half of the 19th century and the first part of the 20th century, with the investiture of the city as capital (1862) and the exit of Romania from the orbit of Ottoman influence, together with the country’s independence (1877). The North American cultural model in particular shaped the architecture of the large central boulevards systematized until the beginning of the Second World War. The change in the political–ideological paradigm in the post-war period as a result of Romania’s entry into the sphere of Soviet influence had as a consequence the taking over of the Soviet cultural model, visible today particularly in the local architecture (Casa Scânteii—House of the Spark, today Casa Presei Libere—House of the Free Press: 1952–1957; Bucureștii Noi district: 1954–1958, etc.). This model faded considerably in the sixth and seventh decades of the 20th century with the withdrawal of the Red Army from Romania (1958), the rejection by the political leadership in Bucharest of the Valev plan for the economic specialization of the former socialist states (1964), and also with the involvement of the Warsaw Pact armies in the revolutions in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968). The policy of reorientation towards national values relying on accentuated industrialization and urbanization contributed decisively to this political–ideological isolation, when large residential neighborhoods of collective housing took shape [38].

The erosion of the communist political system in the eighth decade of the last century, starting with the trade union movements in Poland and the attempts at reform initiated by the last leader of the USSR, associated with the inflexibility of President Nicolae Ceauşescu to accept any democratic reform, isolated more and more the political regime from Bucharest. Consequently, it turned to North Korean-style communism based on dictatorship, censorship, and the cult of personality of the party and state leader, the last political regime that remained compatible at the time with the Romanian one.

The collapse of the communist-type political system and the collapse of political–ideological barriers in Europe engendered the amplification of globalizing connections based on the generalization of the market economic system and global consumer culture. In this context, profound socio-economic changes have taken place, with an impact on urban physiognomy and semiotics, especially at the level of the capital and large cities [39,40].

3. Materials and Methods

Our study area is Bucharest city center, meaning the area enclosed by the Dâmbovița River (Independence Quay–Halelor St.–United Nations Square–Victory Avenue–Dacia Blvd.–Roman Square–Gh. Magheru Blvd.–N. Bălcescu Blvd.–I.C. Brătianu Blvd.–Union Square). Therefore, a larger area than an important part of the Old City Center is considered in the present analysis, based on the following considerations that are in connection to the context of spatial and architectural evolution of Bucharest detailed above. The Old City Center represents the old central area of the capital, with the Old Court and important historical monuments (Manuc’s Inn, Stavropoleos and Saint Anton churches, etc.). Moreover, the entire area itself has been on the Bucharest historical monuments list since 2004. Before this year, only certain monuments and buildings were listed, individually and not within a delimited area [41]. Nonetheless, although the Old City Center stretches beyond I.C. Brătianu Blvd., a route that was developed during communist times, commercial activity has always been more concentrated in the western half of the area, which includes the famous Lipscani Street. A narrow street at the beginning of the 18th century connecting Bucharest commercial center and Mogoșoaia Bridge (the future Victory Avenue), Lipscani (from lipscan, merchants who sold goods brought from Lipsca/Leipzig on the Romanian markets) would gain special importance during the time of Constantin Brâncoveanu ruler (voivode) and due to the inns built in the 19th century [42,43]. Victory Avenue, called Mogoșoaia Bridge in the 17th century because it was paved with tree trunks (and all streets paved in this manner were called bridges), enabled the connection between the ruler’s property from Mogoșoaia and Bucharest. Called Victory Avenue since 1878, this road experienced significant development from the end of the 19th century with the construction of important buildings: museums, hotels, churches, etc. [44,45]. Despite the livelier commercial activities in Sf. Gheorghe-Roma Square, the market area around the church of Sf. Gheorghe lost its importance with the new boulevard erected between 1936 and 1943, I.C. Brătianu Blvd., as a result of the adoption of the Director Systematization Plan of Bucharest from 1936. The differences between the two areas have deepened with time, the number of workshops and small merchants’ shops diminishing in the communist period in the eastern part of the city center especially after the erection of the big stores Cocor and Unirea [46,47].

Gheorghe Magheru Blvd. and Nicolae Bălcescu Blvd. are part of Bucharest’s north–south axis that have featured in local administration projects since the 19th century. This section of the axis represented a solution for doubling Victory Avenue, the main axis in this direction for a long time. The development of the boulevard took place over many years, involving expropriations and demolitions [48,49].

The methodology used in the present study was based on documentation (in scientific literature, mass media, and social media) and field research (direct observation, comparative methods, diagnosis), coupled with the investigation of development, revitalization, conservation, and economic reconversion projects and different perceptions. The main steps included collecting data, photos, legislation, projects for the city’s development, and different analyses from past, present, and future perspectives, which enabled the establishment of different processes by which to examine buildings and companies’ names and commercial signs: conservation, destruction, and reinvention. The businesses used in this study were shops and small service enterprises. The physical signs of administrative, educational, and cultural institutions were not taken into analysis, with the exception of two cinemas that gave the name of the buildings within which they were based, the sign and the name being integrated in the new businesses developed in the area. The goal of the research was to determine if there were a contradiction between the physical reality of the businesses themselves and mass media perspectives, gained from Google News (GN) analysis in Romania, by evaluating the frequency of attributes associated with the case studies. The Google Street View (GSV) feature of Google Maps was an important tool in the comparative analysis of commercial signs’ evolution over time. In the final stage of the study, the main narrative of urban semiotics in Bucharest city center is examined through the magnifying glass of buildings/companies’ names and commercial signs analysis. It is necessary to mention that our objective was to gain a general understanding of phenomena based on the results from the methodology applied above. Considering that different social groups are not characterized by a semiotic unity and that each group perceives regional space in their own way, despite certain existing similarities [28,50], in order to appreciate differences in perceptions of Bucharest city center, it would be necessary to employ qualitative methods at the level of different population categories (residents, people in transit, and tourists), which will be the object of a future study.

4. Results

Spatial semiotics often goes unnoticed, despite its physical presence. Buildings’ names and commercial signs from Bucharest city center were analyzed in this study both spatially and temporally, as the semiotics of a city is in general appreciated through forms organized at different levels of generality, both in space and in their temporal development [24]. Similarly to other landscape components, the impact that commercial signs have is given by a more general context in which the place semiotics develops and of which they represent only a part. Thus, the characteristics of the place participate in defining the semiotics of the respective space, which depends on the synergy between the geometric appearances of the physical structure and factors like culture, lifestyle, politics, or economic trends [14,51]. In the case of Bucharest city center, if before the 1950s the cultural influence had an important contribution in the evolution of buildings’ names and commercial signs, after the communist regime had set up, political and economic factors played a decisive role. The establishment of the communist regime in Romania in 1947 involved the nationalization of businesses and implicitly a change in the course of many commercial activities in the central area of Bucharest: many shops disappeared as a result of new policies of city systematization [46] or acquired other functions and destinations individually or by merging with other commercial spaces. In some cases where the stores experienced a continuity of normal activity, most of the time they underwent changes of name and implicitly of advertising [52]. On the other hand, the transition to capitalism in 1989 meant new visions and development directions that revealed privatizations throughout the 1990s, following which some businesses remained standing, others not [53,54]. The transition to the market economy introduced from the beginning unequal performance conditions at economic level in general, impacting the trade and both smaller and larger services in the central area of Bucharest. The precarious functionality of the places that often change their field of activity [55,56] is reflected in the current circumstances, a reality that can also be interpreted through the eye of the globalization effects on small businesses [39,57]. In this unstable context, successive functional conversions, visible as well in the case of other businesses’ evolution in the city [58], come in contradiction to the identity layers’ preservation. Hence, the shading or disappearance of some companies or the change in the way of their advertisement (commercial signs) demonstrates a situation of identity metamorphosis that inhibits the relationship with the past.

Following the documentation stage, field research, and the analysis of projects of different levels regarding the development of city center commercial activities, five situations were established and mapped (Figure 1): (1) preservation of buildings’ names from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century; (2) between conservation and extinction of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and the first part of the 20th century; (3) preservation of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times; (4) loss of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times; and (5) reinvention in capitalism of interwar buildings’ names and commercial signs.

Figure 1. Buildings’ names and commercial signs between conservation and dissolution. (authors: A.-L. Cercleux and R. Săgeată).

Figure 1. Buildings’ names and commercial signs between conservation and dissolution. (authors: A.-L. Cercleux and R. Săgeată).

It is difficult to make accurate connections and find explanations about how the case studies are grouped into the five categories because they are the result of various investments placed in different periods of time and of different importance for the area. However, certain assessments can be made in relation to their preservation: (a) The preservation of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century are mostly important investments from Bucharest’s economic rise and along the most important boulevards; (b) On the contrary, the buildings’ names and commercial signs conserved from communist times are situated both along the boulevards and adjacent streets, which highlights the spatial homogenization policy from communist times. (c) The names or commercial signs that have been reinvented are located in the Old City Center, highlighting the importance of the connection with the place’s past (place identity).

4.1. Preservation of Buildings’ Names from the End of the 19th Century and First Part of the 20th Century

In this first category (Figure 2), we have taken into account not only those examples of commercial designation but also buildings that have become over time a local brand. They represent a part of the place history, and although at the beginning, they had other purposes (hotels, banks etc.), over time, they developed commercial or other service activities besides, for example, the hotel function, which was very important at the beginning of the 20th century in the central area of Bucharest. In general, their image in newspapers is related to the evolution over time of these significant buildings for the Bucharest identity and architecture, with historical landmarks and stages versus an often-critical perception when referring to the current situation. The identified examples are part of an area with history and that had a vibrant economic life centered on Lipscani Street: “Lipscani street forms an entire neighborhood, the richest, the widest, the most commercial, the noisiest in Bucharest and the most agitated... Every house is a shop or an institution; every man—a merchant; every woman—a saleswoman, a cashier, or a shop owner” [59].

The influence of French culture can be found in the names and the way of being planned for many shops from the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century [60,61]. Magazinul Victoria (Victory Shop), the first large department store in Bucharest and Romania set up in 1928, named in the interwar period Galeries Lafayette, after the famous store in Paris, built in an art deco style and organized according to the model of Parisian stores with large exhibition spaces [62], is currently included on the list of historical monuments of Bucharest. Originally located near Hotel de France (again the French influence), the shop results from the transformation of a part of the Library Palace and Socec & Co. Institute of Graphic Arts, established in 1880. During the communist period, the shop changed its name to Victoria in 1948, being a central store of those times, known under the slogan “Victory Shop, 50 stores in 1”, until the 1970s–1980s [63]. In capitalist times, it started to lose its importance with the building of large malls in many neighborhoods of the city replacing the former industrial enterprises [64]. The last renovation from the 2000s brought changes in both organization and advertising. According to information from GN, Victory Shop is presented in a positive way, highlighting its history and splendor before 1948 [63] or in a comparative analysis of the past and nowadays [65], in which the luxurious side of the interwar trade in Bucharest is often emphasized and less its perspectives for a future promotion. The commercial sign was redesigned in the 2000s when renovation work took place and changed after the fire in 2017 that damaged the store, as it shows a comparison of the 2024 design with GSV images from 2011, 2014, 2019, and 2023. The written format is similar to the previous shapes, but with new materials, less visible, and positioned in the central part of the corner of the building, as in the past.

Grand Hotel du Boulevard situated, also on Victory Avenue, was built between 1865 and 1871 in a German neoclassic style, an innovative construction of those times: running water in every room, elevators, electric lighting and elegant furniture, with a restaurant with French characteristics, a modern bookstore, and the dance club “Pour Toi et pour Moi”, where the young people of the good families danced foxtrot or one-step [66]. For 24 years, it was a ministerial headquarters (1950–1974) [67]. After 2000, renovation work began, and for a long time it was rumored that the building could be turned into an office building [68]. In 2024, it is scheduled to reopen as a hotel under the name of Corinthia Grand Hotel du Boulevard Bucharest, following restoration work that took into account the old image of the hotel and the concept that defined it, but adapted to current times: an historic Grand Ballroom, bar–lounge, brasserie, spa and beauty salon, fitness room, flower shop, and private meeting rooms. The original name overwritten on the corner frontispiece of the building is preserved: Grand Hotel du Boulevard 1867. Articles from GN highlight the following characteristic of the building: for the past—luxury, elegance, Parisian perfume, symbol of Bucharest, and for nowadays—rebirth, sustainability, luxury, and heritage.

Caru’ cu Bere (Beer Cart), with a history going back to 1879, is the most famous restaurant-brewery in Bucharest and represents a part of the city’s identity before communism. Losing its charm and temporarily even its functionality as a brewery, Caru’ cu Bere regained its brilliance in 2010. It is coming back to the quondam brilliance of the restaurant, a historical monument restored and capitalized. Articles in GN highlight its significance for Bucharest’s identity, but also the challenges after 1990, namely, the return to its former image and recognition.

CEC Bank is the former House of Savings and Deposits, the oldest banking institution in Romania, founded in 1864 and which continues to be owned by the state. In 2008, the bank launched its new identity and name in English, CEC Bank. It is an example of identity preservation, but adapted to the present.

In this category, we also introduce a series of hotels that, like all the examples mentioned above, are located also on Victory Avenue, the most important Bucharest boulevard from aristocratic times and famous in all stages of the city’s evolution. Hotel Capitol is the former Hotel Luvru (French influence, Louvre), whose initial construction was in 1882, followed by additions in 1905 and 1910. The hotel hosted the Agricola General Insurance Public Limited Company (as mentioned in the 1911 plans), and in the 1930s, the hotel hosted the well-known Café Royal on the ground floor. The present Hotel Capitol was inaugurated in 1976. Hotel Capșa opened in 1866 and became a soldiers’ casino late during the First World War (a fate similar to Hotel Capitol, converted into an army barracks). Damaged by the aerial bombing of 1944, it was reopened in the 1970s, but only regained its former glory after 1990 under private ownership. Grand Hotel Continental began service in 1884. The Luncheon Bar opened in 1900 was one of the first bars in Bucharest. Closed down several times during the communist regime, it underwent important restoration work twice, the last at the end of 2000s, and reopened in 2009. Hotel Athénée Palace Hilton was built in 1912–1914 and renovated in the 1960s and 1990s, with the initial architecture undergoing certain modifications [58,69].

These hotels are particularly important in the history of the city from the last two centuries, but they are not the best examples of preserving the identity through name or commercial sign conservation. A large number of Bucharest hotels are currently part of international hotel chains. Information from GN highlights their stories, but especially the transformations they underwent after 1990.

Union building was erected and opened as a hotel in 1934 in an American art deco style with neo-Romanian influences. Damaged during the Anglo-American bombings of April 1944, following nationalization in 1950, it continued as a state-owned hotel under the same name. At the end of the 1990s, the building changed its function into an office building, the Union Business Center. Although many of the original interiors disappeared over time, the former Hotel Union building is still considered one of the most beautiful corner buildings in Bucharest. [70]. The style of writing on the corner frontispiece of the building has been preserved (both horizontally and vertically), but instead of Hotel Union, now Union Business Center is written (no modification since 2008 on GSV). In the mass media, there are no direct references to this building, but it is mentioned as being designed by the architect Arghir Culina, who also designed another two important hotels of Bucharest: Negoiu and Ambasador.

Mița Biciclista (Mița the Cyclist) House is the home of the first woman to use a bicycle on the streets of Bucharest, from where she got her name. Completed in a beautiful art nouveau style in the 1900s, the building suffered multiple deteriorations after 1990. Being both a residential and services destination, the house was renovated in 2022 and reopened to the public after 80 years since the last reception took place here. On this occasion, a creative establishment was founded inside the building by the Romanian Association for Culture, Education and Normality (ARCEN), Mița the Cyclist House becoming thus a meeting place in the city for balls, culture, and reflection [71]. In the mass media, there is more of a focus on the controversial life of the owner of the house, Mița the Cyclist, and less related to the architectural values of the building. Intentions for the future of the building are explained, e.g., that following the renovation work, the building will regain its place among the emblematic buildings of Bucharest and is to host a series of cultural and creative events from now on.

Figure 2. Preservation of buildings’ names from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Victory Shop (July 2024); (b) Mița the Cyclist House (February 2022); (c) Union (May 2022).

Figure 2. Preservation of buildings’ names from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Victory Shop (July 2024); (b) Mița the Cyclist House (February 2022); (c) Union (May 2022).

4.2. Between Conservation and Extinction of Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs from the End of the 19th Century and First Part of the 20th Century

This category includes only a few examples (Figure 3). The București (Bucharest) Cinema, former Trianon Cinema, operated in a building from 1884 until its closure in 2004. The cinema is situated on Queen Elisabeta Boulevard, known in interwar times as the street of cinema halls, and development continued during communist times [72]. Parts of the former cinema, such as the former ticket office, were rented by a circular economy store. The building that hosted the oldest cinema in Bucharest is impressive from an architectural point of view, but it is not currently undergoing restoration. Above, there is a hotel named Upstairs Boutique, which in its promotional material states that it is situated in the building of the first cinema in Bucharest. In this sense, it is interesting that the Bucharest Cinema volumetric letters from the 1980s–1990s have been preserved, but their preservation remains uncertain. The image that results from consulting GN is one of carelessness towards these historical monuments with a cinematographic past, for which no funds were allocated for reconditioning after 1990. Many other former cinema halls in Bucharest are in the same situation. According to GSV, the ticket office area and the spaces on the ground floor gained new functions after 2018, but it is a slow process of functional conversion.

Garajul Ciclop (Ciclop Garage), today an historical monument, remains known for being the first building in Europe with an anti-earthquake system on rollers. Erected in 1930, it was a multi-story garage (initially five and later seven floors) and a car workshop with the following structure: a basement with parking and technical spaces, on the ground floor commercial spaces and the car workshop, and on the upper floors parking spaces and technical and office spaces. After 1990, for some years, the building, which in the interim had been returned to its rightful heir and to the former owners from before 1950, was used as a multi-story car park, but nowadays is disused [73]. The multifunctionality that characterized the building over time (garage, parking, café, shops, exhibition area) made it active in the collective memory, and not just for its monumentality and position in the central area of the city. Ciclop Garage remains a symbol of Bucharest modernism. The last time the building was open to the public was in 2015, when the Art Safari art exhibition was held in the former garage, a new concept of museum specialized in organizing important exhibition pavilions in partnership with Romanian and international art museums and private collectors. The current logo, from around the 1960s, with illustrations of various cars on the façade, is disappearing over time [74]. Losing its first letter “C” (GSV image from 2018), later replaced by another letter, but with a completely different design, Ciclop became a symbol of a long-ago Bucharest that often appears inscribed on various products on the occasion of different creative and cultural events or just for the nostalgia for those times.

Scala Cinema, inaugurated in 1936 and also known as the Republica Cinema, was one of the four Bucharest cinemas taken over by the legionnaires in late 1940–January 1941. In 2016, the cinema closed due to a lack of investment from the state. The commercial sign from the 1970s [75] appears for the last time in 2019 in GSV, the year the building in which it is located was put up for auction. In 2024, the entire building, listed as a historical monument, was included in a rehabilitation program. Even though the commercial sign was recently removed, the name of the building, Scala Block, remains in the collective memory. In the vicinity, there are businesses that have included “Scala” in their names: Scala Boutique Hotel and Scala In Rooms & Apartments.

The Palace of the Gas and Electricity Company was built between 1932 and 1934 in a neo-Romanian style. Although a historical monument today and owned by different electricity companies, the building is in a state of continuous degradation. Repair work on the façade of a part of the building are necessary because of the risk of falling masonry in the event of an earthquake. In communist times, the headquarters of the Ministry of Electric Energy were located in this building, on the ground floor being the Electrotehnica Store. [76]. Currently, the Terranova clothing store operates on the ground floor of this building. On the frontispiece of the building above the ground floor, the name of the company can still be seen, possibly the original inscription if we compare it with a picture from the past [77]. A single reference appears in GN highlighting the building’s fragility in the event of an earthquake. Information about its architectural value and historical significance can be found in other sources.

Figure 3. Between conservation and extinction of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Bucharest Cinema (June 2021); (b) Ciclop Garage (June 2022); (c) Palace of the Gas and Electricity Company (July 2021).

Figure 3. Between conservation and extinction of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Bucharest Cinema (June 2021); (b) Ciclop Garage (June 2022); (c) Palace of the Gas and Electricity Company (July 2021).

4.3. Preservation of Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs from Communist Times

In this category, we have included a series of services from various categories that managed to survive in the city center after 1990 (Figure 4). Unfortunately, in relation to these activities with a more recent history, GN newspaper articles are fewer in comparison to the previous categories investigated. It is more about small shops, usually from the category of services with the same name in different parts of the city and related to the local population’s accessibility to libraries, tailoring, opticians, or watch or jewelry repairs, etc. Consequently, assessments of the commercial signs of these companies were made after consulting documents on the internet that detail the evolution of commercial sign styles during communist times and using GSV. Companies in the tailoring, optical, or library category generally have logos from the 1980s and early 1990s. The explanation lies in the city’s infrastructure transformation through the modernization projects that socialism sought to bring to all parts of the city in the 1970s and 1980s [78,79]. In general, these small shops and sings were preserved, for the most part in the central area of Bucharest, between 1990 and 2010, in large residential districts becoming little by little invisible. We can cite as examples Clocks and Watches—Jewelry Store Repairs, with its original commercial sign from the 1960s–1970s (the same logo appears in a GSV image from 2009) and a Tailor shop from Macca Villacrosse Passage from the 1980s, but with a sign remake.

A separate category is represented by the craft shops that were concentrated in the central area that fortunately survived partially. An example is Romartizana shop, located on Victory Avenue, a shop from the 1970s opened as part of UCECOM (National Union of Craft Cooperation which before 1989 had several dozen cooperatives focused on crafts) having probably a redesigned logo; according to GSV images, the commercial sign is the same since at least 2009. Romartizana produced clothes of traditional inspiration for popular wear, mainly for export (it promoted “ia” in Paris—“ia” is the traditional Romanian blouse, included in 2022 in the UNESCO intangible world heritage), and some were intended for the domestic market [80]. Lately, the store has hosted different cultural projects, such as climate change awareness campaigns or stained-glass painting workshops [81]. Not far from Romartizana, there is Cadouri–Artizanat (a gifts and crafts shop) with a logo from the 1980s. Unfortunately, small trade of this type is disappearing gradually in this important area for Bucharest commercial history. An example is the neighboring Expo Moda, leather goods shop, which already appeared to be closed in 2014 (but with the commercial sign still there) and then completely transformed into another type of enterprise in 2018 (according to GSV).

Regarding Hanul cu Tei (Linden Tree Inn Bazaar), an extremely important area for the commercial evolution in Bucharest Old City Center, GN articles focus less on its historical values and more on the future of this historical monument. Built in 1833 on the site of some former shops, the inn has been transformed and modernized in recent years, and nowadays hosts corporate and private events [82]. In the courtyard of the inn, on the ground floor, there are some art shops [83]. The custom display is original, from the 1970s.

Hanul lui Manuc (Manuc’s Inn Restaurant) is of great significance in Bucharest history, as it is located on the land that belonged to the Royal Court until the end of the 18th century. Articles on GN highlight the story and significance of this historical monument building and the challenges during the transition period. Built in 1806 by an Armenian merchant, Manuc Bei, in a special architectural style (Brâncovenesc, a combination of Romanian neoclassical and modern styles), it became over time one of the most important tourist attractions in Bucharest. During the communist period, Manuc’s Inn came under the administration of the Romanian state, being used for commercial purposes. Returned to the family of its rightful owner in 2007, it was restored in 2009 [84]. The commercial sign is from the 1970s.

Steluța is a haberdashery from the 1950s, a famous sewing accessories store from the communist times frequented by housewives who found everything they needed for repairs and touch-ups. In 1991, the haberdashery was privatized, but both the name and the commercial sign remain unchanged [85]. What is remarkable is that the logo retains its original design, perhaps with some inevitable retouching interventions over time [74].

Unirea Shopping Center (the former Unirea Shop) was inaugurated in 1976 during the modernization of this area which since the end of the 1950s had been called Piața Unirii (Union Square). Unirea Shop was intended to be the largest commercial center of the capital. GN highlights the stages of store’s evolution, from its development (a pillar for the communist commerce) to decay, apocalypse, and the challenges of its reconversion. After its privatization in 1999, there was an increase in the interest of large store chains to rent spaces in this building due to its central position and transport accessibility. In the last few years, as a result of trade development in shopping mall areas, economic crises, and the COVID-19 pandemic, the problem of functional reconversion has arisen. The commercial sign and name are from the 2000s.

Cocor Luxury Store, formerly Cocor Shop and located in the vicinity of Unirea Shop, came into operation in 1973. After its privatization in 1996, it aimed to transform itself into a luxury mall. Impacted by the economic crisis of 2008, the shopping center was reopened in 2010 after an extensive process of transformation and re-compartmentalization of the commercial spaces in harmony with the new capitalist malls, but with a modified strategy that no longer was aimed necessarily at the luxury market. On GN, terms such as uncertainty, modernization, reopening, modified reinvention projects, and post-COVID crisis are found in most articles, including the idea of a functional reconversion. Reconversion could come in the form of office spaces, but the COVID-19 crisis also had consequences for this sector by encouraging remote work and teleworking, which increased uncertainty about its future development.

Magazinul Muzica (Music Shop) began trading in 1963, selling musical products and instruments. GN articles highlight the management transformations the shop went through at the beginning of 2010, and also the street performances and urban installations that have characterized it since 2020. According to GSV images, the commercial sign is the same as in 2008, probably remade (partial or total) in the 2000s.

Pescarul (Fisherman) Restaurant opened in 1950, and later, in the 1960s, it was decided to completely renovate and change the design of this location, the interior of the salons being designed in ship style and equipped with specific decorations (upholstery with mahogany paneling). After 1989, no work was carried out to replace the decorative materials because of the wish to preserve this maritime design [86]. The restaurant’s commercial sign appears to have been rebranded in 2019 (GSV) and seems to be a return to a previous advertisement, taking into account the writing style for the volumetric letters, specific to the 1970–1980s, but this is only an assumption, since are is no reliable evidence to prove this hypothesis. In GN articles, there is only one reference to this restaurant, which conveys a message of stagnation after 1990 to the effect of it not being a bad restaurant, but not above other restaurants, its advantage being its positioning in the central area [87].

Some bookstores that opened during communist times kept their names and commercial signs, although with visible transformations over time. One example is Librăria (Bookstore) Mihai Eminescu, with a tradition of over 50 years, which currently has a logo with a different design from the communist period. Based on GSV, the last commercial sign with large volumetric letters specific to the 1970–1980s appears in 2008, possibly a remake after 1990. From the same source, the current design appears in 2018, the change taking place between 2014–2018. Librăria (Bookstore) Papirus is part of the Bucharest Bookstores Company network, which has a history of over 70 years. The logo seems to be from the 1980s, possibly remade in the 2000s. Based on 2011–2024 GSV comparisons, the commercial sign was preserved.

Nufărul (Water Lily) is a dry cleaner’s from communist times. Operating since 1960 by merging and successively reorganizing craft workshops and cooperatives specialized in laundry and dry cleaning, Nufărul is one of the oldest companies in Europe in the modern washing and dry-cleaning sector [88] and became a national economic brand. Since its privatization in 1991, Nufărul has kept its name, but not all locations present the same commercial sign. This is also the case for the headquarters located in our analysis area, where the logo is a recent remake. Based on GSV, the last commercial sign is close to the original design, at least from a color point of view, in 2009 and 2014–2018 images, the years when the last logo changes were made. Fortunately, we can still see a connection to the past and the identity of the place through the promotional motto from the 1970s–1980s (“Nufărul—The best friend of your family”), which goes unnoticed and unappreciated.

An example of preservation, but also of resistance to the challenges for trades after 1990, is Casa de Modă (Fashion House) Venus, founded in 1958 and becoming the most representative business in the execution of made-to-order clothing in Bucharest and the country during communism [89]. Currently, the commercial sign of the headquarters on Victory Avenue is almost invisible (a remake after 1990), not because of damage, but because of the extreme decrease in the store’s surface area in favor of other services, mainly public catering. A similar situation is seen for its production unit (in communism, the decentralized structuring of trade, services, and industry in headquarters and production units was frequently encountered [90]), also situated on Victory Avenue, demonstrating the vulnerability of old trade activities in the 21st century.

Figure 4. Preservation of commercial signs from communist times (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Romartizana (July 2024); (b) Manuc’s Inn Restaurant (July 2024); (c) Steluța (July 2024).

Figure 4. Preservation of commercial signs from communist times (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Romartizana (July 2024); (b) Manuc’s Inn Restaurant (July 2024); (c) Steluța (July 2024).

4.4. Loss of Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs from Communist Times

In this category, both small production workshops and private companies from communist times are included (Figure 5). Among the workshops and shops identified, we mention: (1) Tailor shop from the 1970s that retains its original commercial sign (also confirmed by GSV image from 2009), but only on one side of the building compared to its past; (2) Optics & gold and silver jewelry repairs, with multiple layers of ads from the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s; (3) Spare parts, tape recorders, television sets, radios from the 1980s with commercial sign remake in 2018; in a GSV image from 2008, the volumetric letters (possibly original from the 1980s–1990s) are still visible, but were partially destroyed in 2011 to superimpose in the sign’s center an advertisement of a bookstore operating in the area; after this bookstore had moved, missing letters were rewritten in paint (GSV image from 2014), and in 2018, the entire advertisement is visible in paint directly on the wall; (4) Hats—caps for men, women, and children shop from the 1980s with a possible logo remake around the 2000s; (5) Circuit trips, school holidays, vacations, fairs, exhibitions, self-travel advertisement likely from the 1980s, the original one (based on 2009 GSV image, the commercial sign had the same angle of presentation, with the same letters missing). Apart from these, we identified two state companies: (6) ONT Carpați Import-Export (Carpathian National Tourism Office), a company in the tourism sector from the interwar period and developed as a state company in the communist period as a brand for promoting Romanian tourism and hosted in a building from the 1960s. The commercial sign is probably from the 1980s; (7) Tehnoimport, from the 1970s, operated in a block with unique architecture for Bucharest, with a cylindrical shape and built in 1935 by the Adriatica insurance company. Tehnoimport was a state company dealing with the exploitation of industrial products. The building, a historical monument and to be consolidated in the coming years, has housed workshops of the Plastic Artists Union since 1985, as well as residential apartments and company headquarters [91,92,93]. The commercial sign is a remake, perhaps from the 2000s (in 2008, this design was visible on GSV).

Figure 5. Loss of commercial signs from the communist times (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Tehnoimport (June 2019); (b) Circuit trips, school holidays, vacations, fairs, exhibitions, self-travel advertisement (February 2024).

Figure 5. Loss of commercial signs from the communist times (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) Tehnoimport (June 2019); (b) Circuit trips, school holidays, vacations, fairs, exhibitions, self-travel advertisement (February 2024).

4.5. Reinvention in Capitalism of Interwar Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs

The last category refers to buildings that were repurposed to host other activities, but kept their name (Figure 6). The Marmorosch Bucharest Hotel operates in the headquarters of the former Marmorosch Blank Bank, a neo-Romanian-style building that combines several influences: Byzantine, Gothic, but also Moldavian, erected between 1915 and 1923. Marmorosch Blank Bank was the seat of one of the oldest and most important financial institutions in Romania and played a decisive role in the development of Romanian industry from the last quarter of the 19th century. Impacted by the Great Depression of 1929–1933, the bank continued until its nationalization [94]. Banking functions continued during communism and under capitalism until the 2000s. The former bank headquarters, purchased by a luxury hotel group, has been completely restored and transformed into a luxury hotel, which opened in 2021. The old safe-deposit box from the basement of the building was transformed into a bar, and the office of the first owner, Iacob Marmorosch, into a presidential apartment. GN articles highlight this transformation as a story of successful investment and heritage conservation, but also as nostalgia for La Belle Époque.

Magazinul București (Bucharest Store), built in 1930 under the name of Dinescu and Ionescu Store and nationalized in 1948, became București Universal Store during the communist era. After 1989, business in the shopping center was stopped. In 2007, the building was returned to its rightful heirs, and in 2013 was bought by Dutch investors who reconstructed the building and added one more floor, withdrawn, to the six floors existing in the original structure. The edifice was inaugurated in 2020 with its original name, Magazinul București, having integrated some original elements partially recovered during the demolitions (floor and various ornamental metal elements from the curved showcases, including marble elements) [95]. Based on GSV, in 2008, the store sign was no longer there. The new company logo is from 2021 and was designed to look somewhat similar to art deco designs from the interwar period.

The Voaleta building, known as Voaleta (veiled hats) Shop, a much-frequented clothing store in the interwar period, was originally built around 1900, but because it had deteriorated badly over time, it was demolished in the 1990s and rebuilt in the 2000s. During its reconstruction, some ornaments were preserved and reused, including the Voaleta frontispiece [75]. Inside, for many years, the initial function of the building was preserved (sail of veil products), but lately, successive services changes have occurred: a real estate company and today a beauty center.

Figure 6. Reinvention in capitalism of interwar buildings’ names and commercial signs (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) The Marmorosch Bucharest Hotel (May 2023); (b) Bucharest Store (September 2023).

Figure 6. Reinvention in capitalism of interwar buildings’ names and commercial signs (photos: A.-L. Cercleux). (a) The Marmorosch Bucharest Hotel (May 2023); (b) Bucharest Store (September 2023).

4.6. Buildings’ Names and Commercial Signs over Time—Characteristics and Spatial Distribution

The results obtained following the applied methodology led us to identify some characteristics of the case studies framed in different categories (Table 1). Regarding the spatial distribution of the five categories of commercial signs according to their preservation (Figure 7), we cannot say that there is a firm explanation regarding the grouping of some of them in certain better-defined perimeters. For example, the concentration of commercial signs over 40 years old in the northern part of the study area is perhaps a coincidence, because each case has its own story and different challenges over time. Indeed, it is an important commercial area, with a food market (Amzei Market) and small crafts developed during the communist period. The same situation is noticeable in the southern part of the area, in the Old City Center, important in the history and commercial life of Bucharest. The analysis by categories, however highlights, a predominance of the category of commercial signs that have been redesigned. The concentration of the original ones or those older than 40 years, unfortunately doomed to perish, along the major boulevards, with increased accessibility, visibility, and therefore with more accelerated functional changes in comparison with small streets is not surprising.

Table 1. Overview of different categories identified.

Typology	Economic Functionality	Characteristics of Commercial Signs
1. Preservation of buildings’ names from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century	- Businesses - Edifices that have become over time a local brand: shops and hotels	- Continuity in economic functionality - Redesigned commercial signs
2. Between conservation and extinction of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century	- Different former economic activities: cinemas, garage, ministerial headquarters	- Commercial signs’ preservation is uncertain - Both buildings and former commercial signs go unnoticed in the urban landscape
3. Preservation of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times	- Various services activities: libraries, tailoring, optician’s or watch and jewelry repairs, restaurants, dry cleaner’s, fashion house, craft shops, art shops and supply stores - Economic activities from both small services and large commercial areas	- In general, the small shops and signs have been preserved for the most part in Bucharest city center between 1990 and 2010, sometimes redesigned - Original commercial signs are from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s
4. Loss of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times	- Both small production workshops (tailor shop, optician’s, gold and silver jewelry repairs, etc.) and state companies	- Diverse designs (volumetric or painted letters, other media) - In some cases, multiple overlapping interventions from the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s
5. Reinvention in capitalism of interwar buildings’ names and commercial signs	- Buildings repurposed to host other activities, but keeping their name - Edifices rebuilt from scratch or restored	- Modern and classic designs of commercial signs - Nostalgia for interwar commercial signs’ design

Table 1. Overview of different categories identified.

Typology	Economic Functionality	Characteristics of Commercial Signs
1. Preservation of buildings’ names from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century	- Businesses - Edifices that have become over time a local brand: shops and hotels	- Continuity in economic functionality - Redesigned commercial signs
2. Between conservation and extinction of buildings’ names and commercial signs from the end of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century	- Different former economic activities: cinemas, garage, ministerial headquarters	- Commercial signs’ preservation is uncertain - Both buildings and former commercial signs go unnoticed in the urban landscape
3. Preservation of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times	- Various services activities: libraries, tailoring, optician’s or watch and jewelry repairs, restaurants, dry cleaner’s, fashion house, craft shops, art shops and supply stores - Economic activities from both small services and large commercial areas	- In general, the small shops and signs have been preserved for the most part in Bucharest city center between 1990 and 2010, sometimes redesigned - Original commercial signs are from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s
4. Loss of buildings’ names and commercial signs from communist times	- Both small production workshops (tailor shop, optician’s, gold and silver jewelry repairs, etc.) and state companies	- Diverse designs (volumetric or painted letters, other media) - In some cases, multiple overlapping interventions from the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s
5. Reinvention in capitalism of interwar buildings’ names and commercial signs	- Buildings repurposed to host other activities, but keeping their name - Edifices rebuilt from scratch or restored	- Modern and classic designs of commercial signs - Nostalgia for interwar commercial signs’ design

Figure 7. The commercial signs over time. (authors: A.-L. Cercleux and R. Săgeată).

Figure 7. The commercial signs over time. (authors: A.-L. Cercleux and R. Săgeată).

5. Discussion

Various studies demonstrate the importance of preserving cultural identity in historic urban landscapes [96], some of them emphasizing the vulnerability of names of places in terms of conservation [97,98,99]. In this study, it was confirmed that in the multitude of components that define identity, commercial signs represent a part of the place landmark also. The results obtained lead us to the validation of two working hypotheses: the role of buildings’ names in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is important (H1), and the role of buildings’ commercial signs in Bucharest urban semiotics and identity construction is indifferent (H4). Consequently, this means that there is a contradiction between how we relate, on the one hand, to building names’ preservation, and on the other hand, to commercial signs’ conservation.

The inventory of old commercial signs in the central Bucharest area can therefore provide us with information about place identity. Overall, we are in a situation of losing some identity layers of the city center. A series of studies have demonstrated that in multicultural neighborhoods, the successive transformations of store signs has led to visual erasure from the neighborhood, to streets that are deconstructed and recomposed, notably with the installation of new businesses [11].

In the case of Bucharest, which tends to become multicultural like any capital city, we are already noticing a huge loss of the old layers of store signs from both monarchical and communist times.

Outside the study area, but not far from it, there are some other isolated, drifting examples of stores that resist the changes brought by the capitalist era: for example, a shoe repair store and a textile/linen store on George Vraca street in a building with impressive architecture unique for Bucharest, known as the Florentin Block, a building in a mixed Moorish–Florentine style whose construction started in 1939, but unfortunately, with no information kept about the builder, the architect, or the year it was put into use [100]. Both commercial signs are from the 1970s [75]: in the case of the shoe repair shop, the logo has an alternating cursive font–upright font, but unfortunately a number of elements have disappeared, such as the name of the craftsman and/or the unit and the number of the operation’s authorization, but the former cooperative’s logo remains in the upper-left corner [74].

Nevertheless, in recent years, a series of old trade shops have disappeared from the central area, including shops that opened in the 1990s: Lâna de Aur (Golden Wool), a textiles shop, permanently closed in 2024 and with a very beautifully designed commercial sign in volumetric letters, or Bizon, a shoe shop that moved its headquarters at the end of 2023 from the premises it had had for over 30 years in Lipscani Street into a shopping mall in a peripheral neighborhood of Bucharest. On the other hand, there were some stores that opened in recent years to promote the old Romanian brands, but they did not last in the central area for various reasons. An example is one of the stores of the clothing company Braiconf (founded in 1950 and famous in communism, especially for men’s shirts), which opened on Victory Avenue in 2010, but which did not withstand the post-COVID-19 economic crisis. The shop and commercial sign are visible on GSV from 2019, but not from 2021 following new consolidation work on the building in which it was located.

In the end, a series of assessments can be issued for the relationship between buildings name preservation, old commercial signs, and place identity. (1) In the case of the former state companies, the uncertain situation related to their future, both spatially and functionally, is reflected in the lack of strategies at the municipal level for preserving the commercial signs or old names of those businesses/buildings in the area, storing them temporarily in assigned spaces. Unfortunately, there are no measures to protect or preserve them as long as these spaces do not benefit from restoration work (where required) and functional reconversion. (2) The interest in preserving commercial signs is sometimes visible in the case of privately owned spaces, but on a very reduced scale, with only two situations being registered. On the one hand, it is about symbolic buildings for the central area of Bucharest with redesigned commercial signs that rise from the ashes within some buildings rebuilt from scratch and which kept their names. The most eloquent examples are București Shop, with a new construction and a new destination, integrating digital art at its inauguration, and Marmorosh Bucharest Hotel, another landmark building for late 19th century architecture, both given back to the population with old commercial signs that have become part of the local identity brand. On the other hand, there are small businesses like Steluța Haberdashery, where the commercial sign preservation is due to the involvement of the owner out of duty and respect for the history of the place. (3) Both in the case of public and private ownership, there are a series of changes imposed by the passage of time and the non-adaptation of old commercial signs to current times. (3.1) Frequently, the old commercial signs from the communist period, presented in volumetric letters, but also in other formats, did not have a special design, and the denial of that period can play an important role. (3.2) Moreover, today there is a trend of returning to vintage designs, but mainly those with neon styles, as they were regularly visible in the interwar period. (3.3) The transfer of stores’ headquarters from the city center area to the shopping malls automatically means the need to adapt commercial signs to different ways of presentation, as long as it is about stores in indoor spaces, not opened to the street. In these circumstances, it becomes logical that the old commercial signs with volumetric letters no longer find their place.

Besides these, other external causes may participate in the transformations or the loss of layers in the case of commercial signs. (4) In periods of economic crises, such as 2008–2009 and post-COVID-19, a series of sudden changes in the national economic sphere are the explanation for the loss of some identity elements. (5) The embrittlement of some trades (furriers, watchmakers, tailoring) in the era of globalization has resulted in the weakening of the preservation of some companies’ commercial signs. (6) The need for continuous alignment with external promotion standards can sometimes lead to the complete abandonment of some old designs. (7) The uncertain legal situation of many buildings for which there were requests for retrocession after 1990 may disrupt the functional continuation of many services. (8) The inclusion of many buildings from the studied area in the category of buildings at major seismic risk, class I, does not help in the preservation of commercial signs.

Considering the findings above, it is necessary to increase conservation awareness of this part of the local heritage through various measures and actions. Preservation measures usually come from initiatives of NGOs, cultural associations, or individuals, sometimes benefiting from public financial support. This is the case of the only initiative identified in the protection of old commercial signs in Bucharest, a project of the Baza Association, for mapping, recovery, preservation, digitization, and archiving commercial signs from communist times. The project started in 2015, and in 8 years, approximately 25 pieces were saved: some commercial signs continued to exist under new management, some have followed the craftsman to a new address, some have been carefully stored or maintained, even if the new business was unrelated to the name in the logo, and others have been lost [101]. An exhibition of commercial signs with volumetric letters was organized in 2023 in Bucharest, but was unfortunately canceled after a few days for security reasons. This is proof of the financial and logistic support deficiency in protecting this component of place identity.

The preservation of old companies’ commercial signs by new businesses that replace them is already a practice in the USA and recently in many European countries (France, Germany, Spain, etc.). In addition to temporary exhibitions, there are also museums dedicated to urban graphics that become both collective and individual landmarks. An eloquent example is the Neon Museum in Warsaw, a private investment in a former industrial area, today a post-industrial space with over 200 renovated neon signs, iconic inscriptions, and fascinating stories [102].

Therefore, the preservation of companies’ signs is a complex process involving a continued collaboration between public and private sectors in actions like inventory, framing into a certain period and style, and finding in some cases temporary preservation solutions (in cases of renovation work, demolition, relocation, etc.) or permanent preservation solutions in other situations (galleries, exhibitions, museums).

6. Conclusions

The aim of this study, as stated in the Introduction, was to present buildings’ names and commercial signs in relation to place identity in Bucharest city center by answering questions about their architecture and design, how long they have been in place, and what their main characteristics are. The results obtained in this research demonstrate the importance of the study of building names and commercial signs’ preservation in relation to place identity in a geographical research approach, by considering the three situations described above: conservation, destruction, and reinvention.

The discontinuities in the Bucharest city center identity are visible in contrasting situations of building names and commercial signs’ preservation. In a city that changes in an increasingly dynamic time, as Bucharest does, from economic, social, and cultural perspectives, craftsmen will adapt or give up [103].

Old commercial signs in Bucharest represent crucial markers of urban identity, reflecting the city’s cultural and historical layers. These commercial signs are disappearing due to factors such as commercial turnover, economic shifts, or a lack of preservation policies, highlighting an erosion of Bucharest’s multicultural past.

Efforts to preserve these commercial signs are sporadic, led mostly by individuals or NGOs rather than city authorities. Some businesses incorporate their historical signage into new ventures, but such cases are rare and largely depend on personal initiatives. The Baza Association has made notable efforts to inventory and preserve these commercial signs, but broader support is lacking. Although building names’ conservation may have an important role in preserving some layers of the identity of different spaces, a replication of good -practice examples for many other buildings in Bucharest that tend to be forgotten is of extreme importance, next to commercial signs preservation. The fragility in their preservation will automatically be reflected in the degree of local identity conservation.

This paper calls for increased awareness and collective action between public and private sectors for preserving this component of Bucharest’s urban heritage. Inspiration can be taken from initiatives abroad, such as the Neon Museum in Warsaw, emphasizing the importance of urban graphics as cultural landmarks. Ultimately, preserving old commercial signs requires sustained collaboration for documentation, temporary safeguarding, and integrating them as part of a living, evolving cultural landscape. The spatial distribution of these commercial signs also reveals how historical commercial centers are more prone to losing their visual heritage due to accelerated redevelopment pressures.

The present study has some limitations. Although most GSV data provide information from 2008, there are also situations where the images are visible only from 2019, which limits the research on all identified commercial signs. For Bucharest Old City Center, images before 2019 are not all available on GSV. Therefore, the analysis of some images from archives, newspapers, postcards, etc., was initially included in the methodology. However, there were a series of limitations that would have prevented a unitary approach. Only some pictures of certain buildings are available in the archives, and mainly for buildings famous in the interwar period. As for many examples identified following field research (e.g., craftsmen’s workshops), there are no photos available from the beginning of their businesses, which would have made a fair comparison for most case studies identified impossible. Qualitative research is needed on this topic, and future articles are intended by authors to use different methods in searching for different perceptions of both inhabitants and investors from the central area of Bucharest in relation to commercial signs’ and buildings names’ preservation.