5 ms·

OP here. – Notably, I wouldn't criticize it for not being accurate (the priority given to conveying instructive data has been underlined by Minard himself and m

OP here. – Notably, I wouldn't criticize it for not being accurate (the priority given to conveying instructive data has been underlined by Minard himself and may be considered part of the methodology). The interesting side to it is that it is opinionated (which is probably a property of at least some types of infographics in general, since selection necessary introduces bias), the even more interesting aspect is that the opinion (or narrative) conveyed by the entire sheet is quite the opposite to what it seems to be for the chart in isolation. And, I'd suggest, it has been particularly crafted for this. You're probably right regarding the time that is meant to be spent on it. I always imagined a contemporary beholder slowly following the path with her/his finger, considering and commemorating the corresponding narrative. While it is comprehensive, it's also slow.

ghaff 8y ago
Fair enough. Opinionated is a better word than accurate here. But they're often conflated. Or it just tells a specific story--which I'd argue is the goal of pretty much any infographic.
- masswerk 8y ago
  Which separates it from scientific visualization, which is expected to be a representation as neutral as possible... (The claim of infographics is particularly a different one.)
pvg 8y ago
I always imagined a contemporary beholder slowly following the path with her/his finger, considering and commemorating the corresponding narrative. You also mention something in the article about the events being in recent enough memory to not require dates. I can't imagine a non-history-nerd person looking at a similarly under-annotated map of, say, Rommel's North Africa campaign and recalling much detail of specific dates or precisely what took place at Tobruk or the Kasserine Pass or El Alamein. Would 19th century viewers have been that much different?
- masswerk 8y ago
  It probably depends. I guess, Stalingrad is still in common memory, very much for the same reasons. Edit: This was really a major, paradigmatic event. E.g. pretty much over all of the 19 th century it was clear and went without saying, if there’s a soldier in a painting moving from right to left, it’s Napoleon’s army on retreat from Moscow.
  - pvg 8y ago
    Oh, no doubt. Hell, the nearest big street where I grew up was called 'Battle of Borodino'.

ghaff 8y ago

Fair enough. Opinionated is a better word than accurate here. But they're often conflated. Or it just tells a specific story--which I'd argue is the goal of pretty much any infographic.

masswerk 8y ago
Which separates it from scientific visualization, which is expected to be a representation as neutral as possible... (The claim of infographics is particularly a different one.)

pvg 8y ago

I always imagined a contemporary beholder slowly following the path with her/his finger, considering and commemorating the corresponding narrative. You also mention something in the article about the events being in recent enough memory to not require dates. I can't imagine a non-history-nerd person looking at a similarly under-annotated map of, say, Rommel's North Africa campaign and recalling much detail of specific dates or precisely what took place at Tobruk or the Kasserine Pass or El Alamein. Would 19th century viewers have been that much different?

masswerk 8y ago
It probably depends. I guess, Stalingrad is still in common memory, very much for the same reasons. Edit: This was really a major, paradigmatic event. E.g. pretty much over all of the 19 th century it was clear and went without saying, if there’s a soldier in a painting moving from right to left, it’s Napoleon’s army on retreat from Moscow.
- pvg 8y ago
  Oh, no doubt. Hell, the nearest big street where I grew up was called 'Battle of Borodino'.