When the MTA unveiled its redesigned subway map last month, I spent a lot of time focusing on the inside. In light of the new design of the schematic presentation of the subway system, I explored what purpose a subway map should serve and wondered if The Map was the best representation of subway service.
Lost in the hullabaloo over the inside was the new look for the outside. Check it out:
To me, the outside cover of The Map is the best part of the redesign. Gone is some skewed view of New York City with an arrow that’s far too big and intrusive. Gone are the connotations that somehow, the subway extends beyond the borders of the City of New York.
Instead, the MTA has chosen an artistic approach while highlighting the fact that you have a subway map in your hands. The route bullets are all on the front for the first time since early 1995, and the colorful lines are evocative of subway strip maps. A larger version of the image could be hanging on the wall at MoMA, and that is the sign of a design that deserves to be seen.
29 comments
Never seen that before – and I agree, it’s art. Not that I need it so much now, but I’d be far less chary of having one of those in my pocket than their predecessors in terms of external appearance.
I’ll have more to say when I see it physically, but the image you posted looks annoying to me. The lines-and-dots pattern reminds me of riddles.
Incredibly minimalistic for the MTA – reminds me of the colorful, graphic 70s map designs.
It looks plain and generic, and slightly blinding to me. Helvetica is fine for wayfinding signs, but as a printed title for a publication, it screams a lack of any true effort.
The Map also shows commuter rail (or it did, anyway). Has that been eliminated, or is that supposed to be represented by the colored undesignated lines at the bottom?
Personally, I don’t like it.
Yes, it still is “The Map of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority:” the subway, the commuter rail systems and B&T. And you’re right about the undesignated colored lines, 16 in all.
The same pattern appears on the side of the map that describes the fare and MetroCard info, and they look like equalizer bars on a stereo to me.
Sorry, but that visual doesn’t conjure up “map” in my mind. It looks like the 1970s threw up on a brochure.
I also immediately thought “70’s” – living through them the first time around was bad enough. But I actually kind of dig the retro. Too bad the state of the system is sliding back to the seventies too. Also too bad they’re sticking with the commuter lines and bridges on the map – how useless for the average subway rider.
It’s kind of retro but I don’t know what’s with all the extra bars of color at the bottom. Couldn’t they just scale it so it only fit lines 1-Z?
I was wondering the same thing. Other than that, I like it. A bit artistic in a minimalist sense.
Concur.
I presume that the other colors represent the different branches of MNR and LIRR.
“Gone are the connotations that somehow, the subway extends beyond the borders of the City of New York.”
That was because the back had the commuter rails. Previously that was a separate document, the back were strip maps of the individual lines. The powers that be thought showing more of the services under the MTA domain was a major change/improvement. This was the same time period when they put “MTA” in front of all the agency titles.
Yes, Ben. You always manage to find something nice to say about the MTA no matter how minimal or insignificant the comment such as this one, while ignoring more important stories that are not complimentary.
Wouldn’t it have been more useful if the MTA found a way as it did I believe in the first (or early) rendition(s) of “The Map” to have the cover show Midtown Manhattan so many tourists could immediately see what they needed without having to unfold the entire map.
That could (and should) be an inset over Staten Island, and the SIR could be represented on the other side with LIRR and MNR as it once was on the old commuter rail maps.
That would make much better use of essentially dead space on the map.
The SIR is part of Staten Island and part of the city. Thus it makes more sense to put that system along with the subway map. The scale of the commuter rail map also would make the SIR’s stations look too bunched up together. That’s only my opinion.
If you were to include an inset of a portion of Manhattan (Midtown, Lower Manhattan or whatever), what additional detail can you provide that’s not already there? Without any added unique details, the inset is pretty much redundant.
True, but that space could have been used to put route information, which for the first time is non-existant on a NYC subway map.
Staten Island is a part of NYC yes, but technically not part of the NYC subway system since the SIR is not connected to it. Realistically, how many tourists or other riders who need to use the map will ever get on the SIR? About 99.8% of SIR’s riders are Staten Islanders who know the route well. Also, the SI bus map clearly shows the railway route and can be used as a rail map as well.
If I had to choose between what to put along with the subway map, either the route information or the SIR, in that case I would choose the route information, yes.
I’ll kindly point out that Ben has the right to say and express anything he wants, complimentary or otherwise, significant or otherwise. If he thinks this observation of his is worth discussing, why suppress it? It also lightens up the mood which can get pretty tedious, especially in the topic of NYC public transportation. The fact that you feel the MTA is almost beyond redemption is clearly not what Ben thinks, and I would be wise to respect that.
I would also kindly point out that if you feel the need to address a story that is not covered here, you are entitled to create your own blog, or use the subway/bus/etc.-related forums if that’s your cup of tea, as one of many options to publish your opinions. In the end, it’s each person to her or his own.
I don’t wish to suppress his observation, but it’s wrong to print lighthearted stuff while ignoring the serious stuff. I have the same criticism about the mainstream media.
Ben feels the MTA is not beyond redemption because he is young. I felt the same way when I was his age. I know better now.
As far as the specific story I am referring to that has not been published, Ben knows exactly what I am talking about. He is supposedly investigating it and I am anxiously awaiting to see when and if it gets published. I’m only bringing up the point because people come here to find out what news is happening in mass transit in NYC, and I will admit that Ben does a very good and usually very thorough job. People shouldn’t think however, that they are getting all the news. You are reading only what Ben wants you to know.
I am young myself, but I have noticed the gradual shift from hard-edge reporting to “fluff” stories, say from when I watched an Eyewitness News report of channel 7 from the 1980s on YouTube and compare it to today. But that shift was instantiated by execs whose jobs were, among other things, to attract more viewers to their programs, to make the stories relevant to their demographics, and to cut their losses. The cultural shift affects news coverage of everything. But going forward today in the Information Age, it has become an individual’s job (not news organizations) to seek what stories or current events matter to him or her, for better or worse. That is the reason why I say it would be to your benefit to publish a blog of your own. Following that, your concern then is how you would publicize it in a strategic manner.
I cannot speak for other people, but I do try with my best effort to seek all sides of a story of interest among the sources available to me. The catch is I don’t have time to search and read everything. For transit news, I tend to look in here and The Times first and I will often look at links to other pages from those sources. (I did notice your mention in the recent Times article.) I also look at the relevant transit boards once in a while. Furthermore, with respect to both of you, I am not beholden to Ben’s views or your views. It is through the independent comments (or lack thereof) that often affirms or remands the writer’s POV to the public; I would like to think of myself as being in the middle. Oftentimes here, I find that the quality of the comments drives the success of this blog, not necessarily Ben’s personal views. And some of those comments are in opposition, which shows that Ben isn’t forcing “only what Ben wants you to know.” He could choose to reject things that disagree with his views, and that’s not the same thing. Also, it’s not bad that he has a thoughtful approach to these issues.
If you do publish a blog I will read it with earnestness and with the same consideration as I do Ben’s blog. As I say this, I hope Ben doesn’t mind competition.
Better that the arrow pointing to hell! I always wondered what fool was responsible for the big, bold, go straight to hell, do not pass go pointing arrow.
Be nice…. when zoomed out, that downward arrow pointed to New Jersey! Not to hell.
Maybe I’m too practical, but I feel like this design might actually be confusing – someone might look at this and think it’s supposed to be informative – “oh, the 4 stops on all of the solid black circles…the 1 stops on the open ones!”
Am I the only one thinking this?
Yes.
Well, when I first saw the cover, the first thing that came to my mind was a 1960s/70s design.
Credit to Alexandra Johnson the designer, yes, it should be on the wall at MOMA : )
All in all positive comments. I think you can tell the bitter designers from the ones who appreciate what it takes to satisfy a large entity like the MTA.
here’s an aesthetically pleasing design that speaks exactly to what’s inside the piece of paper you are picking up. accessible, informative, appealing and a pleasure to look at.
[…] is added subtly below the bullet. For the ribbon across the bottom, the new signs borrow the strip map stylings that are prominent on the cover of the new subway […]