Spatial design is here approached through semiotic investigations into artistic interpretations of space, by questioning the oft-presumed sequential order of semiotic meaning-making as: 1) initial recognition of something through similarity, 2) followed by a contextualizing proximity to something else, and 3) grasped as a meaningful sign or message via convention. By questioning the absoluteness of Peircean schemes of succession through Sonesson’s notion of “secondary iconicity” we come closer to how we often give artworks their meaning by seeing similarity not until we are given added information. In this presentation architectural and environmental problems are addressed by focusing on artistic interpretations where such “reverse” sequences create meaning. “Meaning” is here not restricted to logically precise meaning but also the vaguely felt meaning that relates to a variety of questions: How do built environments affect us when thought of, when approached, when eradicated, and when repaired? Such existential questions are here addressed through artistic and speculative spatial design, in works regarded not only as consequences of the methods chosen (facture) but as staying in direct relation to the condition of the world (consequence). These “semiotic-artistic” works can apart from open-ended experiential interpretation also generate abductive steppingstones to elaboration of future worlds or world views, hence have elements of design. A specific finding that relates both to the reverse semiosic order as mentioned above, but also reflects the mundane problem of absence of recognition of the current human-geological condition, is here labelled “consequential aesthetics”.