The River Thames is missing!
Alternative content
The London Underground map – with the river! Photo by Joe Bennett/flickr
What do we mean if we say that something is missing? We mean that it has disappeared, that it has gone! Suppose I put my car keys down on the table. A few minutes later, I look for them – but they are gone. I am sure they were on the table. They were on the table only a minute ago. But now they have disappeared. They are missing.
It is not just car keys that can go missing. Your luggage can go missing at the airport; and children can go missing in a busy shopping centre. And sometimes much bigger things go missing, as we shall discover in this podcast.
But first, some history. If you have visited London, I am sure that you have travelled on the London Underground. The earliest underground railway line in London was built in the middle of the 19th century. Steam engines pulled the trains, and smoke filled the stations and tunnels. Despite this, Londoners loved their new underground trains. They were a quick and convenient way to get to work. People could work in central London but live away from their work, often in better houses than before. New underground lines were built in the late 19th and the 20th century. They helped London to grow bigger and bigger.
Both Londoners and visitors needed to know which underground lines went to which places. They needed maps. Until the 1930s, maps of the underground were simply street maps with the underground railway lines added. In the centre of London, where there are lots of Underground lines and stations, the maps were crowded and difficult to read. But if you made the map so that you could see easily what the underground system in central London was like, the map had to be very big to cover all the underground lines in the suburbs.
The problem was solved by a man called Harry Beck. He drew a map which looks like an electric circuit diagram. He made central London big, so that you could see all the lines and stations, and the suburbs small so that the map was a reasonable size. He drew the underground lines so that they were either vertical, or horizontal, or at 45 degrees. He gave the different lines different colours. He said that people needed the map so that they could see how to get from one station – say, Victoria – to another station – say, Marylebone. People did not need to know the exact route of the railway line, or the exact distance between stations. So there were no streets on his map, and the stations are all about the same distance apart. But the river Thames was there, of course, like a blue snake through the middle of the city.
Harry Beck’s map was a huge success. It made the complicated railway system easy to understand. Londoners and visitors loved it. Other cities in other countries copied the style of Harry Beck’s map for their own transport systems. It became an icon – a symbol – of London.
Obviously, over the years the map has changed. New underground lines have been built, and new stations. Earlier this year, Transport for London – the body which runs the Underground – produced a new map. It looked just like the old map, but something was wrong. Something was missing. The River Thames was not there! It’s OK, said Transport for London, you can’t see the river when you travel on the Underground. So you don’t need to know where it is! But Londoners were unhappy. The River Thames is not particularly beautiful; but it divides London into North London and South London. If you have lived in London, you will know that North London and South London are almost on different planets. South Londoners do not like going north of the Circle Line. North Londoners take their passports with them if they travel south of the river. So the river is important, and now it was missing from the Underground map.
The public outcry was so loud that Transport for London quickly decided to print a new map, with the river back where it should be. We English are deeply conservative about little things. We like Harry Beck’s map the way it is, with the river, and we do not want to change it.
Share this podcast on Facebook
Categories podcasts
Tags
Comments (27)
This file has been downloaded 66175 times
3 January 2010
Dear Peter,
thanks a lot for your stories. I'm trying to improve my English and it seems that your stories are very useful.
I love London: I've been there twice. I have some maps … with the Thames on them!
Thanks again.
3 January 2010
Dear Peter,
thanks a lot for your stories. I'm trying to improve my English and it seems that your stories are very useful.
I love London: I've been there twice. I have some maps … with the Thames on them!
Thanks again.
1 November 2009
i find the podcast very interesting, i was never in london , but i hope one time to see the north and the south of london
1 November 2009
Your podcasts are always interesting, Peter. Thanks. I've been to London three times and I love it. I've never seen the undergrond map with the river Thames on it, but I think it would be really nice!
30 October 2009
Katharina
I do not have a Birmingham accent. If you want to hear a Birmingham accent listen to this – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fePU5CI
Best wishes
Peter
28 October 2009
Dear Peter,
thank you for the wonderful last potcast about the map of London. I thought we have the London map style in Berlin too, but I couldn`t find the Spree!
Thank you for your nice storys and your wonderful Birmimgham accent!
My favorite potdcast is still now " we love snow" and I hope England will have some snow perhaps in two months!
Liebe Grüße,
Katharina
28 October 2009
Hi . Difficulty in download !
28 October 2009
Well thats an interesting part of History. Have you ever heard of Skype-English School? I told some of my foriegn friends about it and they signed up for a 15 minute free lesson. Most of them have signed up and have taken some of the bigger courses since hey enjoyed it so much. http://skype-englishschool.com/ Anyone whos interested should check it out.
27 October 2009
Peter, Sonia, thanks for your help.
26 October 2009
Alexandr
Thank you for your comment. Have a look at the podcast about "Travelling to a sales conference" (http://www.listen-to-english.com/index.php?id=326). Yes, "by" is always right – by bus, by car, by train; but we can also say "on the train", "in the car", "on the bus", "on a bicycle".
26 October 2009
Hello,
Dear Peter,
Hope you be well & happy,thank you very much for everyt hings, I have introduction your site to many of my firends, and they got happy to know your site.
Best regauds
Naficeh Falakzadeh
25 October 2009
thanks for a wonderful topic. Please have a look on my blog and tell me what you think, Peter. The address is imohamed.blogspot.com. Thanks
25 October 2009
Alexander: English is not about grammar is about exceptions! :)
25 October 2009
hi mr peter
please can you give us proper advises to be good in read and write english language.
25 October 2009
There is one thing i want someone to make my mind up. The script contains: "you can’t see the river when you travel on the Underground". As i was tuaght and somehow remebered it one should say: travel by car, by train, etc. Otherwise if you say: travel on bus, it particulary means that you travel sitting on the roof of the bus. I just study english and got confused listening this podcast. Could anyone please explain to me the proper way of speaking in that case.
25 October 2009
Dear Peter,
Whenever you put on your podcast a new audio, I got excited and estimulated in learning more. Learning not just English, but culture as well.
Because of that, I would like to thank you for this great opportunity.
P.S: I WANNA HAVE EPALS. LETS EXCHANGE EMAILS? gboechat1@hotmail.com
Sincerely,
24 October 2009
Dear Peter,
I love your courses publish here and I use all of them.
You are hardworker person who is warmhearted .
I hope you will be healthy and also as a kind teacher.
Yours sincerely,
Hadi Pirhadi
(hphadi)
24 October 2009
Dear Peter,
I was wondering which structure is used in the following sentence from recent podcast.It dosenot comply with any CONDITIONAL structures that we have already studied.
If you have lived in London, you will know that North London and South London are almost on different planets.
By the way,many tanks for your great podcasts.
24 October 2009
Honestly. Ive been in London for twice. it was a little bite hard for myself to get on train. it is busy and easy to get lost and also expensive. but I love London and I had a good time there. I would came back again. jejeje
23 October 2009
Dear Sire
More thankes for your reading story. I am verey happe to contunous with like these reading.
beast regards Maged
23 October 2009
A clever history again, thank you very very much, I enjoy all of them so much all the time
23 October 2009
Hi Peter
Thanks for your fun story, i like that
as soon
bye bye
23 October 2009
Hi Peter!
thank you for your story!
I like it so much!
23 October 2009
Dear Peter,
it is great that you are so hardworking and we can read and listen new article so soon.I look forward for every new podcast,I love the way you write about either celebrities,newspapers,politicians or ordinary things.Thank you very much!
23 October 2009
that's so funny! I lived in london 6 months this year, working in the south, living in the north…and yes! they are different places. Too bad I didn't get a change to collect a map without the river :(
23 October 2009
I don't like listen to English CDs in the class but I enjoy your podcast because of its different and interesting topics. You are not helping me to improve my listening skill but giving me a lot of useful knowledge.
London first built next to the River Thames,so it is a historical symbol and should be in the map, not because of North Londoners or South Londoners, isn't it?
Again, thank you for your great work!
Special hello from Vietnam.
22 October 2009
so beautiful The River Thames. It must be on the map. I travelled by boat on the river last Easter
thanks Peter. A new interesting subject