Edward Tufte: Envisioning Information

Layering and Separation

Tufte begins this chapter by stating the now well-established principle of confusion being the fault of the designer, not the user or the information itself. This chapter focuses on the confusions prompted by improper combinations of elements with the designer’s equation: “1+1=3 or more.” While this equation may trigger some negative feelings from MIT students in general, we can rephrase this as “chart complexity and confusion increases superlinearly with the number of components.”

I definitely agree with this sentiment, and looking back on projects I completed before my introduction to basic data visualization theory last spring, it definitely shows. Complication can be attractive to oblivious designers because it it the most obvious display of work. However, initial amounts of work cause a spike in complication, and real effort is displayed when the message is distilled to its simplest and most understandable form.

While this chapter thoroughly discussed a few proper and improper cases of layering and separation, the chapter (along with much of Tufte’s work) did not leave much room for interpretation or experimentation.

Stephen Few: The Chartjunk Debate

On the other hand, Few tackled the difficult task of appending to Tufte’s thoughts on “Chartjunk,” and he focused on the shortcomings of Tufte’s definition of the term. Having heard one other critic of Tufte’s rigid framework before, I agree much more with Few, and I love that his title invites more of a discussion. Additionally, his source citing also prompts questions about Tufte’s credibility (since at this point, his opinions carry a lot of weight). The data was also compelling, showing that all visualization recommendations have to be framed within a context, which Tufte’s arguments lack. While embellishments might be inappropriate and misleading in a straight-edged political article, they can definitely serve a purpose in certain kinds of educational or advertising materials, which strive for memorability over presenting exact facts.

Overall Commentary (Slight Tangent)

In addition to inspiring thought about data visualization and the “Chartjunk” debate itself, the contrast between these two pieces made me think about how writers affect the discussion surrounding a topic. Tufte’s writing style is very factual, which actually stifles some creative thought (although it does direct students’ opinions in a very valid direction). I actually prefered Few’s style more, in that it invites further discussion of the topic with completely reasonable levels of uncertainty (doesn’t feign objectivity).