I thoroughly enjoy giving my undergraduate cartography lectures and talking about the design of the London underground map is a highlight. Students who have and haven't been to London and used the map have very different impressions of it. (Mostly positive if they've used it - by the way!)
However, it looks like it might be up for a redesign...
The Independent have just run a story on a potential redesign and have mentioned a lot of the comments that are brought up in class by previous users of the map half a world away.
Yes, it does cause you to have a rather warped view of the actual London landscape - and I've fallen for the two tubes and multiple stations rather than a five minute walk alternative because I wasn't quite sure where I was. However, there's something particularly liberating in that lack of geographic context for a geographer! And many areas in London are easily navigable.
So which is better? The old 'diagram', straight line map or the new more topographically accurate one?
However, it looks like it might be up for a redesign...
The Independent have just run a story on a potential redesign and have mentioned a lot of the comments that are brought up in class by previous users of the map half a world away.
Yes, it does cause you to have a rather warped view of the actual London landscape - and I've fallen for the two tubes and multiple stations rather than a five minute walk alternative because I wasn't quite sure where I was. However, there's something particularly liberating in that lack of geographic context for a geographer! And many areas in London are easily navigable.
So which is better? The old 'diagram', straight line map or the new more topographically accurate one?
No comments:
Post a Comment