A mirror crack'd


This has been doing the rounds on twitter and in the comments already posted, but it's worthy of its own thread - the tube map reversed, to give South London its due. Brockley, Hilly Fields, Brockley Rise, Ladywell and St Johns all feature.
The only pity is that the poor old north doesn't get the benefit of an extended East (West) London Line.

82 comments:

Robert said...

That is excellent work. I'd wish I'd thought of it myself!

Tyrwhitt michael said...

I had this up next to my desk for a couple of years.

It caused all sorts of consternation.

Anonymous said...

And to think you could have beaten Nick to It.

Monkeyboy said...

Lou will be thrilled

Anonymous said...

I saw a real tube map the other day with the East London line marked on it, with Brockley - kind of looks like they are trying to fool us into thinking it is a tube line, by colouring it in all nice. When those of us who have lived on London Overground lines in the past know, it will not be anything like the same thing at all. Though obviously nice to have it. Just think they are trying to scam map-viewers into thinking it's the real deal...

Anonymous said...

I saw this more than 5 years ago - wanted to print it in the newspaper I was working for but TfL forbade it as a breach of copyright and were pursuing the two guys who came up with the map on those grounds.

Brockley Nick said...

Sigh - here we go again.

How will it be different from a tube line, in practical terms?

Will it have a good frequency? (12 trains tph through the middle, 8 trains tph to Brockley)

Will it directly connect with the tube network? (District Line, Jubilee Line, Crossrail)

Will the trains look and function like tube trains (with air con)?

Will they all stop at the same stops, so you don't have to look at a scoreboard, to see which train goes where or risk a fast train to Sevenoaks?

etc.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

Anonymous said...

Nick, antagonists logic. Find the small differences and use them to claim something is less than it is.

For them, the ELL doesn't go undergorund or into Central London. Ergo, despite the fact it will have the frequency of the tube and be part of the oyster card network it can't be as it misses 2 pedants points. ;-)

It's part of the tube network, get over it!

Anonymous said...

Does it run until as late as the tube? Not nearly.

Does it run as often as the tube? Not nearly.

It is a good thing, don't get me wrong. But it is not the same thing! That's what bugs me when people refer to it as a tube extension, and start putting it on the tube map in colours people associate with tubes.

Anonymous said...

This line will accelerate change in Brockley more than any other factor. Doubters will soon come around once it's up and running. We obviously look at it from a Brockley perspective - but there are many other people who will use it north of the river travelling south to get to places like Shoreditch and Hoxton for a night out. If you live in Finsbury Park for instance and want to go out around Brick lane- change at Highbury and Islington, etc, (from 2011). It will be these people as much as people from the south who will disseminate to good word about this line and that will eventually filter out to the other stops.

Brockley Nick said...

No one ever disputed that the East London Line was a tube line before it closed.

Now, it has a longer route that goes to more places, more frequent and considerably nicer trains. And yet some people now say that it is no-longer a tube.

The only reason it is not a "tube" is that is not being run by London Underground. The only people that that matters to are union members. Maybe we'll get fewer strikes...

Anonymous said...

Didn't realise people were so touchy about this! But I suppose I'm touchy on my side too. Have people here actually used other London Overground services that much? Difference to forlorn traveller using Hamptead tube station versus the Hampstead Heath overground line is HUGE, coming from someone who used both regularly til a couple of months ago. Really not even close to same service!

Brockley Nick said...

I agree that the Hamstead overground service is not equivalent to a tube. But the East London Line is not equivalent to the Hamstead service.

Anonymous said...

The ELL does seem to be more tube like than the rest of the overground network. I guess the perception of the line is going to take a while to change but word will get out how useful it is. It's a shame that it's been lumped in with the Overground signage, etc, like Nick said - it always use to be a tube - what's changed?

Anonymous said...

Nick - it's HamPPPPPPstead.

That's one P for all the times you've missed it out! :-)

(For some reason it always makes me think of 'Hamsterdam' in the Wire when I see it misspelled...)

Brockley Nick said...

Sorry! Don't know what came over me. I don't go north of the river, you see...

Tamsin said...

The East London line was never really part of the underground system until the Jubilee extension and the interchange at Canada Water. Before that you had to change at Whitechapel (down there with the Old Kent Road at the grotty end of the Monopoly Board) and that was still a change away from the Central, Northern or Bakerloo lines.

The trains are just like underground trains - had a good peer into one at NXG the other day. Cattle trucks with hardly any seating.

Brockley Nick said...

@Tamsin - in all my time in Brockley, commuting to London, I don't think I have ever had a seat in the morning. If you travel in from New Cross, the problem is even worse. Far better to have plenty of standing room than cramped doorways, so that people coming from Kent have plenty of seats.

Anonymous said...

This sitting down issue is a joke - unless you're pregnant, old or disabled you can bloody well stand up! Ooh I need a good sit down. Stop being a bloody wimp! The journey only lasts about 30 mins! Oh no 30 minutes of standing - how will I manage it! I might collapse. 90 percent of us sit down all day at work, the last thing we need is to do is sit down on the way into work. Anybody of reasonable fitness should be able to manage standing up. It's not like there are no seats - give em to the frail and the rest of us can and should stand!

Hugh said...

Plenty of tube lines run overground. Peace out.

John said...

What's the point of this map?

Anonymous said...

John - take a good look and work it out! Not that difficult.

quick brown fox said...

Presumably to show what the tube might look like if the service Sarf of the river was as comprehensive as it is on the north side, and vice versa.

Anonymous said...

Your right Hugh, plenty travel overground but are still called Tube trains

M said...

I used to regularly travel on the District Line into west London - that has a frequency of about 8 trains per hour and runs partly overground but it is definitely considered a tube.

Mind you it's shit and unreliable and I hated using it so maybe not the best comparison...

love detective said...

@ BN - "The only reason it is not a "tube" is that is not being run by London Underground. The only people that that matters to are union members"

this is similar in sweeping generalisations to your comment about no one ever uses public libraries these days

Don't let the fact that 75% of people polled by IPSOS MORI wanted the line to continue to be operated by London Underground (i.e. a public sector operator as opposed to it being privatised*) get in the way of your pronouncements on the matter

any cursory review of the state of rail transport since privitisation and related public opinion thereon shows that it's not just union members who have a view on these things

* and no, just because deutshhe bahn effectively own the operator of the ELL now doesn't mean it's operated by the public sector

Brockley Nick said...

I'd love to see that unbiased survey love detective. I doubt 75% of Londoners know the difference between LU, LOROL or TFL, let alone have a strong opinion on it.

Put it another way, if you asked 1,000 londoners whether they thought Bob Crow should have more or less of a monopoly over London transport, I wonder what they'd say.

Lou Baker said...

I like this map - but Brockley is only on one line. Boo.

Even in a fantasy world commuters here are shafted.

Anonymous said...

How long before they employ people to shoehorn passengers on like In Japan.

Brockley Nick said...

A lot less long than if we were reliant solely on Southern trains?

love train said...

@BN "I'd love to see that unbiased survey love detective."

IPSOS Mori Poll on ELL

carried out on behalf of RMT yes, so clearly IPSOS MORI fudged it to ge the answer RMT told them to....

"I doubt 75% of Londoners know the difference between LU, LOROL or TFL, let alone have a strong opinion on it"

perhaps not although i'm sure 100% of Londoners know (and regularly experience, positively or negatively) the difference between a privatised service (ELL post extension)and one run by the public sector (ELL pre extension)which is the point being made, a point that you rather authoratively announced matters only to union members remember

"Put it another way, if you asked 1,000 londoners whether they thought Bob Crow should have more or less of a monopoly over London transport, I wonder what they'd say."

relevance of this to the topic in question being?

their views on whether bob crow should have more or less of a 'monopoly' (not sure how you can have more or less of a monopoly mind)are not mutually exclusive with demonstrating strong support for public transport to be operated by the public, and not the private, sector

Brockley Nick said...

You can have more or less monopoly power - hence why we have competition authorities to decide what degree of market share is acceptable.

The question of Bob Crow's grip on the London Underground system is absolutely central to the issue. It's why the RMT and the Morning Star have been moaning about the ELL for years.

If you have a seperately-run but publicly-owned system like the ELL, then when the RMT inevitably calls another strike, ELL passengers will be alright Jack and their ability to disrupt London life is slightly diminished.

By the way, I can quite understand why the Unions would feel unhappy about the situation, my point was that I don't believe the rest of the population is troubled by it.

"carried out on behalf of RMT yes"

I rest my case.

Anonymous said...

The DLR is run as a franchise and it's shit...... Sorry I mean great.

BobCrowesSon said...

I might do a survey on a London Unerground Station to see how many people know who Bob Crowe Is

M said...

That survey (not quite) in full:
"Do you know who Bob Crowe is?"
"Yes, he's a w*nker"

Anonymous said...

Say what you like about driving, I always get a seat.

Anonymous said...

Are you the driver then ?.

Anonymous said...

Yes. Mind the doors.

Anonymous said...

Those saying East London Line is not a tube because it doesn't go underground forget that the only 'underground' Underground lines are the Waterloo & City and Victoria lines.

Also, think about the relative positions of the ELL platforms at Whitechapel to the District and H&C platforms.

The East London line will be much more of a success that other London Overground routes due to its much higher frequency. For eg. Gospel Oak-Barking line only has 2 trains an hour most of the time. People perceive London Overground to be a low frequency service but hopefully ELL will change that.

Monkeyboy said...

....and 'London Underground' was actually formed by merging different railways. In fact each line still have different trains, signalling systems and some operational rules. To the user it's irrelevent - get over it.

Crofton Parker said...

Nobody is claiming it isn't a Tube because it isn't underground! It isn't a Tube because it isn't. Don't know why people are so keen to insist it is! Take any London Overground service and you will know. Fewer trains, running fewer hours, with grimmer stations and fewer staff.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, even 12 trains per hour is less often than you'd expect on a normal line.

Brockley Nick said...

It depends where on the tube network you're talking about.

It's certainly a lower frequency than zone 1 commuterland, but comparable - say - to the frequency you'd get if you lived on a branch of the northern line, the district line, etc.

Plus, of course, we have 4-6 overland trains per hour...

For the people saying that the trains won't run as late - do you know that for sure? Do you have the timetable details please? I'd love to publish them if so.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't matter whether it's a tube or not, the fact is it has a higher frequency of service than many sections of London Underground and double the frequency of the old ELL Underground line.

Anonymous said...

Tell you what, when people ask you how to get to Brockley on the tube you can drone on to them about how they can't because "actually, it's not a proper tube because blah blah blah" while the rest of us just get on with it, deal?

Brockley Nick said...

I guess it matters to this extent:

When someone asks you whether Brockley has a tube station are you going to say

a) sure, jump on the East London Line.

b) well, technically no - we have something called the East London Line, which used to be a tube, but which is now operated by LOROL, which is part of TFL. Because it's operated by a private company, rather than LU, it's not technically a tube service, but to all intents and purposes, it's pretty much the same thing (only airconned with newer trains).

It will appear on the tube map, but if you read the fine print you'll see that it's not actually part of the network, although as it intersects with the tube network you could be forgiven for thinking of it as a tube service.

And so on.

Danja said...

"I live in South-East London"
"I live on a tube line"

Cognitive dissonance yet to be resolved in some minds.

Brockley Nick said...

@Danja - you've cracked it.

Monkeyboy said...

Grim station? Yes, as are some tube stations out in the sticks. Is there really an issue here? People seem to be able to cope with the dlr and that is REALLY not the tube

Mb said...

Had to google 'Cognitive dissonance'

The Oracle said...

The "Tube" is a nickname for the circular tube-like tunnels and platforms through which trains travel.

However, by some careful study many a learned man and women concluded that it may be easier in a modern age to run trains above ground rather than under them; less disruption, and cheaper too.

But does this mean that Brockley is a Tube and not a duck?

Well, the name “the Tube” derived from the Central line. Back then though it was originally nicknamed the "Twopenny Tube" and this moniker eventually transferred to the Underground system as a whole.

Brockley will not just be part of the tube network but an “interchange” within the tube network as a whole.

Like the tube system before it, which was made up from various interchangeable networks by the way, Brockley will shortly be a new, emerging, part of that old network of trains previously known as “the tube”.

That old network also derived from similar Brockley transport systems by the way. In fact what we see as the tube is a series of networks within the underground system.

The Baker Street & Waterloo Railway opened in 1906, now known as the Bakerloo, was, like Brockley, an independent cog in the network; a network that evolved, constantly.

According to some posting here that evolution appears to have ceased. But why?

It wasn’t until 1908, in an effort to increase passenger numbers, that the underground operators agreed to promote their services jointly – and it became "the Underground" which you now call “the Tube”. (Only the Metropolitan resisted integration. It maintained its independent image until the creation of London Transport in 1933.)

I am sorry to upset the Tube-deniers, but... in or about May 2010, a little known “hidden gem” in south-east London, "the Hampstead of the South”, will lose its transport independence, and Brockley will finally become part of the extended ELR, one of the original “underground”, or should that be “Tube” collectives.

But, alas, if there is another World War, it will not have any Underground station in which to sing “Who Do you think you are Kidding?”

Perhaps it will not be an underground after all.

Ed said...

I can't believe that I am the first to point on that this, like Harry Beck's original, is a diagram, not a map.

Bring on the ELL; shall we have a BC party on platform 2?

ppp said...

Some of this ELL hype is going OTT. The countdown timer and reports. It is train service, it should mean more space on trains to London Bridge, but the way that things work, so many properties will be built because of ELL hype that we'll soon be back to square one with congestion.
It will make life better, in some ways but people will discover that for themselves. Just calm it down.

Anonymous said...

@Ed

Why point out something everyone already knows?

Everyone calls it a map, including TFL. It is a map of sorts, 'mapping' the relationship between the stations.

Anonymous said...

PPP, making an area more attractive to live and work in by building better transport links should be stopped because the trains will get crowded?? I can see your political career hitting the stratosphere with that one "vote PPP for fewer trains"

And why oh why is the fact that the long boxy thing that runs on rails regularly that links up with another boxy wheely thing with a slightly different operating model so endlessly facinating? As stated previously, DLR users seem to be able to cope with that startling concept with ease.

Anonymous said...

> That survey (not quite) in full:
> "Do you know who Bob Crowe is?"
> "Yes, he's a w*nker"

Was that a survey of polite people?

Anonymous said...

Swearing often gets deleted. You obviously didn't get the (not quite) bit.

ppp said...

Anon I just do not know how you have got to where you have from my comments, pardon the pun but I think you've gone off the rails.
Calm down.

Tamsin said...

For pedants the term "tube" only applies to the deep lines, the Picadilly being one, that were actually tunnelled under London. Many of the others, notably the Circle and District, were "cut and cover". Built under roads by closing the road for months on end (and we think we have trouble with roadworks) removing it totally, digging down, building the railway line and then putting it back again. And somewhere in West London (Patrick might help with a reference here) there is a building which is just a facade as the trains run right under it.

ppp said...

And speaking of political careers I just want to give thanks for the life of Michael Foot, 96 who's passing was reported today. A great contributor to British political life.

The Oracle said...

Tamsin, you may not have read what I posted previously. The "tube" is, and has always been, more than a deep cut wraparound. It has, and continues to be - above and below -an evolving transport network. If that is talking it up or down, then, frankly, me dear Scarlet, I don't give a damn.

Anonymous said...

Am I alone in stating this, but WHY is this the tube map 'reversed'?

Anonymous said...

Why not? It's art...

Anonymous said...

Erm.... No reason, someone thought it would be a laugh

Anonymous said...

Erm... bare with me, I am not of your intellect. What is this map?

Tamsin said...

A strange invitation, but I will "bear" with you while you look at the map/diagram closely. It is a brilliant conceit - someone indeed having a laugh - and thank you, Nick, for bringing it to our attention.

Anonymous said...

Tamsin, whatever you do, please DO NOT bare with me. (Perish the thought.)Brushing aside your pedantic wayes.. I still don't get it. I've stared and stirred, but I still don't sea what it is you see. (Mind you take a look at the spinning lady online and U will see that people rearely do sea the same thing.)

Brockley Nick said...

I don't get how you don't get it?

On one level, it's just a funny, interesting idea to imagine and visualise what the tube map would look like if applied to South London - what place names would become famous, how would areas be linked, etc.

On another level it's a brilliant way of highlighting the public transport imbalance between north and south London.

On a third level, it visually demonstrates how much the tube map distorts the public's perception of London. Look how North London effectively disappears. Now ask yourself why so many Londoners think South London is a foreign country.

Tamsin said...

Like the tea-towels you can buy in Sydney airport of the world turned upsidedown.

John said...

A couple of points; firstly, the map is pointless. If you want to see the imbalance between transport provision north and south of the river just look at the current map. Hey presto! Furthermore, the tube map is a spider map which distorts locations anyhow.

There is also a difference between tube lines and underground lines in that tube lines run through a tunnel (piccadilly, northern et al). The underground lines run 'underground' through an engineering measure known as 'cut and shut' whereby a cutting is created and then covered (circle, metropolitan et al). They're all forms of heavy rail so I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Monkeyboy said...

You mean 'cut and cover' of course. To really send you to sleep lu engineers tend to call those sub surface lines, I forget what they call the 'proper' tube lines. It really is of academic interest only.

Monkeyboy said...

From a geeky internet site...

"There are seven Deep Level lines on the Underground in total: Bakerloo, Central, Jubilee, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria and Waterloo & City lines.

These sections are typically much deeper than the sub-surface sections, with the deepest point on the whole tube network being just north of Hampstead under Hampstead heath at 220 feet deep."

I need to get out more....

Hey Presto! said...

yeah. 'Cut and shut' is the term used by dodgy car dealers when two insurance write-offs (one damaged by a front-end shunt, the other by a rear-ender) are magically combined to create a new car.

Monkeyboy said...

this is another reason why the reopened ELL is more useful than some of the doomsters claim. Of course thats assuming it's not canned which is not out of the question.

John said...

Ok, a slip of the wrist...I meant cut and cover. Very, very sorry.

Hey Presto! said...

c'mon John. You should know by now that any tiny slip-up here will elicit a veritable torrent of pedantry from those of us with nothing better to do!

Monkeyboy said...

You know you love it.

Brockley Nick said...

@john "firstly, the map is pointless. If you want to see the imbalance between transport provision north and south of the river just look at the current map."

If you want to understand the absurdities of political life, don't bother reading Jonathan Swift, just observe the world for yourself. Don't bother with Van Gogh's sunflowers, just look at some actual sunflowers.

drakefell debaser said...

I think this map is quite clever and a little bit of FUN.

Map pedants look away now, but here is another clever use of the tube map

http://ow.ly/1ewIK

It is accurate in some respects because the Circle Line service is usually crap.

John said...

Nick,

Surely the difference is that art, literature or poltical commentary involves interpretation and expression? I was looking at the map from a functional perspective. It doesn't highlight the inequalities of transport provision on either side of the river any greater that the actual tube map; therefore I consider it to be pointless in that respect. However, like Simon Patterson's tube map you could argue that it has artistic merit.

Incidentally, I would rather have the St Johns train service than the circle and district line (Mon- Sat, at least!).

Monkeyboy horizontal on the sofa said...

equally pointless, possibly inacurate nit fun.

http://images.vizworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/underskin-samloman-100dpi.jpg

Jonty said...

Might I just that this blog and the discussion after has been extremely interesting.

I am currently doing some academic research on this line at UCL and whether or not use of Southern service and or house prices in the area have changed

Your comments have cemented and provoked many of my own thoughts on the topic. Thank you

On a side note which I don't think has been mentioned; I think the map would be much more effective if the river had been kept in its 'normal' position as its the only piece of 'geographic' reference available as such

Brockley Central Label Cloud