There is an ongoing debate about the preservation of ghost signs, which has cropped up here from time to time. It has particular poignancy at the moment, because the Hammersmith Palais has just been demolished - and with it, a large and rather lovely sign. Sam of Ghost Signs pays tribute here.
Secondly, should ghost signs be restored? In other words, is their appeal partly thanks to their fading appearance, the equivalent of patina in antique furniture? Or should they be brightened up so that we can experience the original effect, in all its colourful glory, as with York's Bile Beans sign?
Is there even an argument for more extreme measures? One Cadum soap sign in Paris was missed so much that a replica was eventually painted to replace it.
Losing a sign is always a shame, especially when it's as good as the Hammersmith Palais one. However, they do survive in one important location: the Ghost Signs Archive at the History of Advertising Trust. We also need to ask whether part of their appeal is their ephemerality. Fading, unevenness, incongruous additions, a little mystery when words are obscured: are these all part of their charm?
I'm not even sure what my own view is. I do prefer originals to restorations, but I waver over protection orders. I'd love to hear your opinions.