Though I have looked into map design in previous posts, this week I took a closer look into why information design has varied in it's execution since the beginning. When I was studying at Fuel Coffee in Wallingford this week, I was looking through a bunch of old maps they had on a shelf, when I stumbled upon an extremely illustrative guide map of all the attractions in Connecticut. As an art piece I found it to be extremely interesting and beautiful, yet, as far as info design is concerned, I found it to be a bit busy and complicated to dissect. When quickly browsing through to find which attractions were represented by each illustration, I was easily distracted by the various other pictures. Nevertheless, a sort of child like instinct drew me in to begin with, and it most definitely held my attention. This interest pushed me towards wanting to find the attractions' descriptions on the chart above it. I thought bringing in Vignelli's famous subway map, was a considerable contrast to this attraction map. It shows how much infographic maps have varied even when the idea of infographics was fairly new. Vignette's classic, strict, mathematical, and color-coded design is easy to understand. It creates a quick first read, and allows the information to become much less fussy and more constructive. That being said, there is something about the illustrative approach that adds a sense of interest and liveliness to mapping. Should we place a stronger importance on good, grid-like, swiss design or should interest and illustration play just as important of a role? No matter what, just like long ago, I believe we will continue to see diverse variations in design for years to come.