For some reason I started thinking again about Peter's statement that the best street photography doesn't rely on signs (he said "signage," and we'll come back to that in a moment). In my mind I ran back over Kertesz, HCB, Willy Ronis, Walker Evens, Elliott Erwitt, Marc Riboud, Helen Levitt, Robert Frank, Winogrand and a couple others -- in other words, classics from when street was taking shape as a genre, and I couldn't come up with an example that would make Peter even a little bit wrong. If I get out all my books and spend some time I suspect I can find one or two cases where signs were used, but one or two cases wouldn't be enough to refute the charge.
Then I started thinking about what Peter was objecting to, and found that he made that clear with the statement: "Once an image is dependent on the written word it is no longer universal." That's right. Unless you're familiar with French a French sign in one of HCB's pictures wouldn't add much to the meaning of the picture. But what about signs that don't depend on words? I remembered one I shot a couple years ago that depends very much on a sign. Here it is. Peter's still right about the written word, but I don't think you can damn all signs as not contributing to street photography. I'm pretty sure I posted this picture once before, but since it illustrates my point I'll post it again. Now I need to go back and see if I can find some other mute signs that contribute to street photography. I think the best place to look will be Helen Levitt.
About "signage." It's a terrible word that started popping up in the late seventies. If you close your mouth, pinch your nose, and inhale, you'll get "sinage." But "signage" needs to be expectorated.