![]() In 1940, Beck was asked to create a version of the map with linked rings for interchanges - an idea that someone presumably thought would be a strong symbol, without considering how it would actually look on the page: But this wasn’t the end of the board’s meddling. The experiment was fairly short-lived, and the diamonds were ditched in 1937. Beck did his best to comply, but the result was not a thing of beauty: For example, in 1935, the UERL board demanded an update to the map that would use bold lines for stations within the central area, and much larger symbols for interchanges. ![]() There were also plenty of missteps along the way, most of them not Beck’s fault. The following year, the colour scheme was updated, giving the Bakerloo and Central lines their now-standard red and brown hues. Tweaks and interferenceĪs it stood, Beck’s tube map needed no improvement, but refinements were continually being worked in, many of them still with us today.īy August 1933, the diamond-shaped interchanges were back to the neater rings of Beck’s original design (though they were still coloured rather than black). In the event, Beck’s map was a clear hit: the original print run of 750,000 was snapped up in a month, requiring a further 100,000 to be printed almost immediately. Originally distributed as a folding pocket-card, the first Beck map came with a slightly cautious explanation on the front: “A new design for an old map. The result, published in 1933, is instantly familiar: Interchanges, for some reason, became diamond-shaped. In the process of preparing the map for publication, a few adjustments were made: stations without interchanges were now shown with 'ticks' instead of blobs, and the handwritten type evolved to something very similar to the font used today. The company, in its wisdom, promptly returned it, explaining that it was not interested in such a "revolutionary" map.īut Beck didn’t give up: the following year he tried again, and this time the company agreed to buy the design off him for just over £10 - equivalent to around £600 today. All the same, much more of the network is represented, and the spirit of the modern map is detectable.Īlthough Beck’s map had been entirely a personal endeavour, he was encouraged by friends to send it in to UERL for consideration. Station names are all in capitals, as was customary at the time, every station is marked with a 'blob', and interchanges are shown with multiple circles. There are plenty of differences between Beck’s first effort and the map we know today. In 1931, he finished drawing his first tube map based on these principles: But he retained an interest in London’s transport system, and with time on his hands, set about on a project to "tidy up" the tube map by - as he would later recall - "straightening the lines, experimenting with diagonals and evening out the distance between stations". Formerly an engineering draughtsman for UERL, he lost his job with the Underground in the late 1920s as a result of funding cuts. The man who created the tube map we know today was Harry Beck. ![]() Stingemore’s work was clever, but its impact was far from earth-shattering: the Underground Electric Railways Company of London (UERL), which operated the tube, continued to publish large geographical maps alongside handy pocket-sized copies of his diagram. Even then, Stingemore wasn’t able to fit in the furthest reaches of the tube system: the Bakerloo, Metropolitan and District lines are all cut off at the edges of the map. It showed outlying stations such as Edgware and Richmond appearing to be only a short distance from the centre of town, promoting a sense of community between inner London and the suburbs. Not only was the new map neater, it arguably had a social function. The result was a map that no longer represented the true shape of London - and thus couldn’t be superimposed on a street map, as earlier attempts had been - but did allow more stations to be represented with larger text: The 1926 tube map In 1926, a map-maker named Fred Stingemore set out to improve matters by regularising the spacing between stations, and allowing himself some artistic licence with the routes of the various lines. The map also omitted stations further out from the centre, for reasons which become obvious when you look at a later map that tried to show more of the network:Īs you 'zoom out' from the centre of London, you end up with a huge amount of wasted space toward the edges, and an illegible crush in the middle. Station names had to be written in small text, often at odd angles so they could be crammed in between awkwardly twisting lines. The map showed all the important central stations (including several that have since closed down or changed names), but it didn’t make it easy to find your way around. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |