Jonathan Villaman
ARC3374
Site Planning and Engineering
Prof. Arthur Archer
01/13/12
Mapping
The author’s definition of mapping goes far and beyond the basic definition of the word. From the first sentence of his paper, James Corner sets up the reader and accurately introduces his intentions of redefining what mapping is; “Mapping is a fantastic cultural project, creating and building the world as much as measuring and describing it.”
The introductory paragraph mentions the “agency” of mapping. It is not until later in the reading that one begins to understand what is meant by the “agency”. The intentions become clearer once we define the term agency. The dictionary Merriam-Webster defines the operation as “the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power” and in an instrumentality sense: “a person or thing through which power is exerted or an end is achieved”. So as Mr. Corner later describes maps have an immense power over us, of how we view the world, what things are important to us, and in turn the maps we create have the power to guide us in certain direction, or from a certain point of view. At times Corner speaks about agency of mapping as if he feels that it should become a field of study as a whole, because of all the different elements that it envelopes; the study of natural processes and historical context to name a few. That the creation of a map should not be simply to record or trace.
A map is a collection of data that represents information gathered during mapping. According to Corner a map is much more than data about a location. A map speaks about what is important to the individual, to the city, to the country and culture. A map can express the feelings of a person towards a certain topic, how that person sees the world. A maps can be used to express views, experience of that individual. Fuller’s Dymaxion Airocean World Map of 1943 is a great example of an individual rethinking what a map is and what it can represent, and he does this by looking into himself and asking “What do I think is important to me?”. As the author explains there was a time in history when the landmasses were distorted to fit the view that northern Europe was bigger than the southern hemisphere; this expresses a national bias. The map of the alleys of Paris and experiences that the artist encounter are another example of what the individual views as important and deems recording as well a new image of a world recognized city. At the city level there are a different set of information that is required and ruled by construction information that is critical. Moreover it has to do with city planning, conservation, and drainage are just a few among the many items that one must record for the city. All those however do not have to be within the same map. More importantly is what a map does, as stated above the agency of mapping exerts power over us, one that is subtle yet it defines all of our decisions. A map becomes the canvas in which we produce our work, and thus it affects what we can put on in. A map can set certain boundaries, it can send you on a certain direction just by showing or hiding information about the site. Maps can have numerous layers of information and how those layers are expressed tremendously affects how we perceive the spaces shown and thus what we will propose to do about the spaces. “Maps are in-between the virtual and the real” This is because a map represents what is immediately visible within the real world while also representing ideas or relationships that is usually communicated verbally, furthermore , if done correctly, a map may have multiple layers of understanding and reading, some unintended by the mapper.
Before the map can become a map usually one must do the mapping; the gathering of information about the site. The information can vary from what is visible to the naked eye to the ones that aren’t quite visible but understood through the use of artistic representation. Other information only comes to life while gathering the information or the way that the information is gathered. Like the relationship of the trees and a body of water that might be present on the site; which can only be noticed when mapping them. Information about the weather: wind, snow, sun, rain etc. can only be expressed graphically as this events only occur at different interval. Other information about the site can only be presented one research has been done, information such as historical importance and events. Mapping also extends beyond the items, animals, vegetation and people that inhabit a certain area; it requires the understanding of the effect that the categories have upon each other. Mapping is an action, a verb, not merely means towards an end. The mapping of information will give a deeper understanding of the site, one that will drive the design into the best possible outcome for all the parties involved. Mapping precedes that map.
Mapping and maps therefore are in no way objective but rather are subjective to a wide range of things, first and foremost the individual that is gathering the information and his/her culture, background, experience etc. Then comes the city, and country to which he/she is part of, even political affiliation. For as much as one tries to be objective, the subconscious usually finds a way to show the subjective bias of the mapper. Even when Corner mentions the “objectiveness” of the city maps it is somewhat inaccurate because the map then is subject to what the city deems important. So the maps becomes objective to the individual but subjective to the city. The same idea can be taken to a larger scale, national scale. When the maps were first being “created” and territories claimed there was most certainly a subjective bias from the major world powers to impose their will into how maps are to be created. After learning of Joaquin Torres-Garcia’s Inverted Map of South America the thought from my teenage years came back; and a relief that I wasn’t the only one who has pondered about this. The map Joaquin speaks to the subjective nature of maps, of something that we see as the norm now, could have such as well been different if history had a few turns. “Why not “South America” on top?” The answer is simple, because the world super powers made the biased decision to have their own countries on top. Luckily the US and Europe share the “top” of the world map. A nice thought and question is “What if they did not share the top?” If for instance Europe happened to be on the northern hemisphere and the USA in the southern, now that would have been interesting for the world powers to work out. Possibly a war just to find out who gets to be on top. When mapping the mapper looks at a site and tends to think to “what is most important about this site?” Within this one simple question an entire array of biases can be formed, from the background, to the profession, to his/her experiences. Because the mapper will determine what is important about the site from the biases previously mentioned, for one cannot distance themselves from such things for those things is what makes us who we are as individuals. So to be objective is to forget oneself and all that makes us who we are, and in turn that will render us unable to make anything at all.
The design process is a play, in which there are many actors, all of which have their varying range of importance, values, and roles to play, all of which important to the cohesion of the result. Mapping is the set of such play, the script actually is much more fitting. For in the process of mapping decides the players, the setting and is the canvas on which the resulting play shall occur. Mapping does not quite dictate what is to happen within a site, but rather it guides, it sets the groundwork for the “play” to occur. “Whereas the plan leads to an end, the map provides a generative means, a suggestive vehicle that “point” but does not overly determine.” As Corner puts it. And mapping precedes the map, so mapping has a compounded effect on the design process. While in the mapping process the mapper can select what elements to bring forward and which ones to pull out, thus affecting what information is displayed as well as how. However Corner hints to allowing the mapping inform the mapper, as he puts it “The resultant relational structure is not something already “out there”, but rather something constructed, bodied forth through the act of mapping.” With all this, it is very clear the Corner feels, and proves that mapping has an enormous effect on our designs.
This paper has tremendously expanded my knowledge to what a map is and the process of mapping. More than that, it has taught me that mapping is not only for location of things, places, or buildings, but it can also be used to express ideas, events, relationships, cultural and sociological information about an area, country city. When gathering information one must look at a wide range of sources not limited to the site itself. That mapping does not belong in an island untouched by any biases, but rather that the very creation of a map is full of biases, and what we all now see as standard has a long history of subjective decisions. So a map does not only affect the designer but it also affect the general public, for all is in a cycle: the mapping affects the process, the result affects the map, and it turn that affects mapping.