What is a map? Asking this question will generate as many different responses as the number of people you ask. Maps hold a myriad of meanings that vary based upon the context of the question. Maps allow us to define ourselves, our allegiances, our histories and our future.
While the word map evokes ideas of travel, place, space and physicality, we also use “maps” to guide us through our daily lives – agendas, calendars, to do lists, mind maps, syllabi – these are all maps that guide us to some sort of destination.
Even looking at the definition of the word map in the dictionary creates a vague understanding of what a map is. Again, context is key in understanding the notion of a map. Is it being used as a noun or a verb? Is it being used to define territory or define our day? In this context, just looking at the definition of the word map, it seems as though the word really has no concrete meaning. This is interesting considering the general acceptance of maps to define and guide. The context of the use is largely equivalent to the meaning of the word itself.
In The New Nature of Maps, J.B. Harley asks the question “What is a map?” Again, we are faced with varying answers based upon to whom the question is posed. On one end of the spectrum we have the view that “the nature of maps is that they are a mirror, a graphic representation, of some aspect of the real world.” (Harley), but when asking a historian the same question bears the answer leans toward “a social construction of the world expressed through the medium of cartography.” (Harley)
More interestingly, Harley contends that cartography is an art of persuasion. When we look at what maps convey to the user, this is a plausible contention. Again, context is key. While we look at maps as being scientific, factual and accurate means of communicating data, ultimately we need to look at who has made the map and who has commissioned said map. Historically (and concurrently) maps have been used to exert authority, power and legitimize rule. Maps mark territory – be it literal or figurative. “Maps redescribe the world – like any other document – in terms of relations of power and cultural practices, preferences and priorities.” (Harley) In A History of the World in Twelve Maps, Jerry Brotton rightly proclaims “The world is always changing, and so are maps.” Considering the power constructs that maps often represent, this is a very accurate statement.
Keeping these ideas of authority, power and rule in mind, we must change how we perceive maps. They are not coldly scientific, unbiased factual records as we often treat them. Harley posits that maps are “images of the world, maps are never neutral or value free or ever completely scientific.” In looking at the historical context (and current context), cartographers were (and are) the means to an end for the person or entity commissioning the work. The system in which maps are made is not dissimilar from the patron/artist construct we have seen through the ages. In considering this relationship, one can make the connection between the desires of the patron and the message of the maps made.
In one context, maps tell us where to go. They guide us to our destination and orient us in unfamiliar territory. In another context, those same boundaries and borders tell us where not to venture. In the history of mapping, there has been a variety of ways to delineate boundaries and borders, the known from the unknown. We make assumptions that are influenced by our world view, but we can never be certain as to the true intention of the map as intended by its commissioner. Borders become fluid and ever changing. They are open for interpretation and disagreement. Conflict is common based upon the interpretation of borders. Simon Garfield illustrates this with the recounting of Google’s attempt to map the world. “As it becomes more powerful, Google finds that it encounters obstacles it never anticipated, often geopolitical and social ones that seldom detained mappers with empire-building intent in centuries past… When the Nicaraguans invaded Costa Rica, they blamed Google Maps for doing it because our borders weren’t right.”
Taking this information into consideration along with preconceived notions of what a map is, there are now more questions than answers shaping my view of maps. Never had I considered maps to be anything other than a factual and accurate representation of the physical world. Overall, the course of this semester helped shape how I view maps. Instead of something concrete and scientific, maps are far more fluid than I had previously thought. Additionally, maps were put into perspective as a system of classification of non-spatial data. While I still may have a bit of trouble conceptualizing mapping as art, it is now a more readily available tool for analysis. Maps are all around us and it is our responsibility to interpret them objectively and questioningly.
Works Cited
Brotton, Jerry. A History of the World in Twelve Maps. London: Allen Lane, 2012.
Garfield, Simon. On The Map. New York: Gotham Books, 2013.
Harley, J.B. The New Nature of Maps. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001.
No comments:
Post a Comment