Ink Rationing & Backstabbing
I’m only a few blog posts in, but so far the trend seems to be intending to research one thing and ending up somewhere else entirely. Today is no different.
We are going to take a very brief look at an interesting London Underground map that I recently happened across. I think way finding design is especially interesting. It involves communicating an idea clearly and efficiently without taking for granted that the viewer speaks the same language as you. This idea fits into a system that is applied throughout an entire building, city, or even country. It sounds like such a unique challenge.
When way finding design is done well, it's a beautiful thing to behold. When it’s done really, really well, it’s Transport for London. The design system that keeps London moving is hands down and without a doubt my favorite piece of design history. It’s such a small piece of the entire design history pie, but even then it’s like it’s own little world. I could go on for days about the maps, posters, tilework, upholstery, and much more, but like I said, we’re going to be brief today. Just know we’ll be back.
So, I don’t recall where I first glimpsed this map, but it certainly caught my eye. Obviously the lack of color was immediately intriguing, since the Tube map’s color scheme is part of what makes it such a success. What could possibly be the motive for this seeming downgrade to the map?
Well, this map was published around 1941 when rationing was a very big deal in Europe. I’d never considered ink something that would need to be rationed, and I’m not terribly smart so I don’t understand why this needed to be rationed, but it was.
Designed by Hans Schleger, it was a drastic simplification of the previous map’s six colors, and reduced the scheme to just brown and blue. It used blue triangles to note main line terminal stations. Its lack of additional color made it much more difficult to understand.
So that’s it. Thats what I was able to find about this unique map. I was very curious about it, and was a bit disappointed I didn’t find more. I suppose when you’ve gone through the number of maps TFL has, one rendition of the map becomes just another blip in the timeline.
What I accidentally happened across during my research, however, is some ye olde drama that I can’t help but report on. When I first started learning about the underground for my chapbook project in publication class (2016…how did that happen…), I had read that there was some, uh, upset around the map during this time but I never looked into it until now. So, though barely related to the 1941 map by Schleger, I’m going to tell the tale and throw some delicious way finding design history at you while I’m doing it.
We’ll begin our tale with Harry Beck. Now, Harry Beck is one of my favorite people in design history. You may notice some biased as this tale unfolds. Deal with it. Harry Beck is an OG and transit maps worldwide would probably still be atrocious without his work.
Beck was an electrical draughtsman working for TFL, and one day he had a thought. At the time, the Tube map did it’s best to display the stations in a way that was geographically accurate as well as proportionally distanced apart. That was great, except it didn’t make it especially easy for riders to figure out the map. If they couldn’t use the map to find their station, their train, or when they needed to change, what was the point?
So Beck took all that accuracy and threw it out the window. Who needs it? He rethought the map using his electrical draughtsman brain and came up with something resembling a circuit diagram. That was in 1933. London still uses the same map today, obviously with line and station additions….what does that tell you?
It’s a darn good map. It’s beautiful. It’s a work of art. It’s worthy of being framed and hung. In fact, it’s framed and hung on the wall above me in my office as I type this (thanks Becky). That’s how glorious this map is. If you haven’t seen it, you’re probably wrong and you have, or you’ve seen something similar because Beck’s design choice here is what set the standard for years to come.
Okay, enough gushing (for now). Fast forward to 1938. The map needs a few updates and they reach out to Beck to make them right? He came up with this great, innovative design just five years ago, of course he’ll do the updates. Wrong. They reached out to Hans Schleger, who had been doing some poster design for them.
Well, Hans took Beck’s map and he RUINED IT. That might be a touch dramatic, but you be the judge. Look at this. No good. No good Hans. The blue shading is meant to highlight the central part of the city and map, but this was just not the way to do it. It reduces the readability on the type, the opposite of what you want to do in way finding design.
It probably goes without saying the Beck was pretty mad and disappointed that TFL had gone behind his back to have Schleger make changes to the map. They told Beck that it was merely meant to be an experiment, and wasn’t meant to make it that far. Beck didn’t believe them and frankly neither do I. Here are Beck’s comments on the matter:
"I have just happened to see a proof of a new Underground folder. The “H.C. Beck” diagram has been used, but with considerable and, I suggest, undesirable, alternations by another artist – one not on the staff – without reference to me.
The idea of redesigning the old geographical Underground map in diagram form was conceived by me in 1931; the original diagram, published in 1932 [sic: 1933] was of my own invention and design. Every variation of it since has been either made by me or by the lithographer under my supervision.
When I recently signed a form assigning the copyright of this design to the Board, it was not merely understood, but was promised, that I should continue to make, or edit and direct, any alterations that might have to be made to the design. This practice has been followed without exception since 1932.
I wish therefore to place on record my protest against the action taken in the present instance."
While Beck thought that overall the map sucked (my words, not his, if you can believe that) he did concede that a few of the changes were improvements - but only a few. One of these changes was using a single circle for interchange stations instead of several different colored circles.
TransitMaps.Net calls Schleger's map an “evolutionary dead end”. I agree, and would venture to say that so does London since we haven’t seen anything like it since.
So there you have the short, sassy little tale of how Harry Beck poured out his heart and soul to innovate the transit map to what we’re familiar with today, and Hans Schleger basically ruined it in my very professional opinion.
I know this was a short one but I hope you enjoyed this little peek at early London Underground maps. I thought they were both interesting glimpses into the history and people behind transit maps as we know them today. I am confident that we will soon be back on this topic, since it’s a personal favorite of mine.
Sources
Historical Map: 1941 London Underground Map by Hans “Zéró” Schleger, Transit Maps, https://transitmap.net/london-1941-zero/
Historical Map: The “Zéró” London Underground Diagram, 1938, Transit Maps, https://transitmap.net/zero-underground-1938/
Harry Beck's Tube map, Transport for London, https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/culture-and-heritage/art-and-design/harry-becks-tube-map
