Natalie Haynes: The Tube map is misleading – that's its beauty

The thing is ...

Tuesday 16 August 2011 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The thing is that London's Tube map is beautiful. Harry Beck's diagrammatic representation of how to get around the London Underground is also extremely effective. It tells you how to get from one place to another, and it allows you to decide if you'd rather go more stops and change less often, or vice versa.

It does not, however, tell you everything you might want to know about London, above and below the pavement. It rudely makes stations look much further apart than they are in real life, especially if they're on different lines. The addition of the overground lines has made that all the more glaring – South Hampstead looks to be roughly as far from Euston as Machu Picchu, despite being a paltry six minutes away.

So you can see why someone might have thought we needed a new map. A map which dispenses with the elegant Beck angles, and represents London as the size and shape it really is. A map which, among its other virtues, makes me want to cry.

Mark Noad designed his new map with the non-Londoner in mind: "A number of my friends from outside London and overseas have told me they found it confusing and made navigating the city difficult for them." Which is all very well, but has anyone asked if that is something which actually needs to be fixed?

The whole point of visiting another city is that you have to learn how it works, and that shouldn't be too easy. Try to use the metro map in Brussels, and you will discover it's so far beyond baffling that it is simply easier to walk to your destination, or perhaps forget about going there, sit down and have a waffle. This leaves the metro system conveniently empty so that people who live and work in Brussels can get around with ease. It also adds considerably to the takings of waffle vendors all over the city.

Given that the Tube is so over-crowded already – and that's before the Olympics adds the extra event of seeing how many people you can cram in a carriage before Norris McWhirter starts spinning in his grave – I think we should make the Tube map as impenetrable as possible. The least we can do is add in the ghost stations which no longer exist, chuck a couple of extra rivers in up the top, and continue to pretend that Queensway is nowhere near Bayswater.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in