This volume ventures into terrain where even the most sophisticated map fails to lead--through the mapmaker's bias. Denis Wood shows how maps are not impartial reference objects, but rather instruments of communication, persuasion, and power. Like paintings, they express a point of view. By connecting us to a reality that could not exist in the absence of maps--a world of property lines and voting rights, taxation districts and enterprise zones--they embody and project the interests of their creators. Sampling the scope of maps available today, illustrations include Peter Gould's AIDS map, Tom Van Sant's map of the earth, U.S. Geological Survey maps, and a child's drawing of the world. THE POWER OF MAPS was published in conjunction with an exhibition at the Cooper Hewitt Museum, the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Design.
I found Wood’s literary style somewhat cumbersome. However, this book is essential for the philosophical and earnest cartographer. It discusses not only the history of maps but their social meaning. For example, what is the significance and intent of a county map that runs borders through Indian reservations? Denis Wood goes deep into the social contribution made by cartographers.
Mapping philosophy with a twist of curmudgeonliness, parsing cartography from the top down: the power structure, the agendas, the symbology, the unstated. You get a healthy dose of mapmaking semiotics, which is not necessarily a bad thing unless you never want to see the words "signified" and "signifier" again as long as you live. But I like Denis Wood's take on things, and the chapter where he recreates a child's cognitive evolution of hillsign making, including unpacking the way landmasses are portrayed in The Little Engine That Could, Millions of Cats, and Mike Mulligan and His Steam Shovel, is worth the price of admission right there.
Wood can get a bit didactic, but that's not always a bad thing, and his skepticism is by and large healthy. Even if he does punctuate like a 12-year-old girl, this is a very readable and entertaining treatise.
This was a terrible read and was riddled with long, rambling sentences that were often just repeating previous statements. This man is also a terrible person. I gave up about 55% into the book. Will not be attempting it again.
I'm still not sure how I felt about this book. Part of the problem is that it was far more philosophically oriented than I was expecting. There were a few pages and one whole chapter toward the end that I skimmed enough to know that I wasn't interested in reading, and just skipped. I was expecting a much more practical book on how to make maps that work well, and how to balance what a map needs to show vs. what would make it too cluttered to be useful. Instead what I got was a treatise on the fact that maps aren't reality, but are a symbol that connects us to reality. He spent an entire chapter deconstructing the fact that this image: http://odt.org/Pictures/vansant.jpg was lauded as the first map of the world taken from space (among his objections: it's actually 40,000 photographs, selected for lack of cloud cover, lushness of the flora and daylight, so that it ignores the realities of weather, seasons, and the spherity of the earth). I don't regret that I read it, but I don't regret skipping parts, and I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone else without knowing that it was exactly what they were looking for first.
THE POWER OF MAPS unveils the agenda behind maps, not just as sources of neutral and unreputable truth, but as something that is so pervasive in the common human imaginary that it has passed itself off as timeless truth. Wood explores the development of maps, the different forms that they took and which versions of maps endured the test of time while others faded into history, and the biases that may be hidden in some of these maps. The book goes on to follow the trajectory of mapping practices and the different purposes that maps may serve, and how the information that is shown or omitted from a map can forward certain agendas.
One of the most memorable parts of this book was when Wood drew comparisons between the indigenous practice of mapping and the Western practice of map-making: indigenous practices of mapping are to familiarise themselves with their environment and to respect it, while Western map-making tends to be more instrumentalist in marking out details like caves for mining or the heights of certain hills to lob weapons over, to make use of the land as a resource rather than to live in symbiotic harmony with it. When you explore an area and capture it in a physical map, are you claiming it as territory for your people to extract resources from?
This book was relatively accessible and an illuminating read—I think it’s a good starting point for anyone who’s interested in learning about political geography and the history of mapmaking, and where society is moving forward with maps.
This book highlights that maps tell stories and reflect the biases of their makers, but these points are largely obscured by stream-of-consciousness writing.
I really enjoyed this--the sociology and semiotics of maps was not something I every really thought about before. The guy's writing style is kind of entertaining--he has this habit of using a lot of ellipses and. . .italics. Which gives you the impression that he is deeply. . .stoned.
Not the easiest read, and didn't really have much that was new to me. But I'm in favor of people reading this because it illustrates the dangers of blindly trusting experts, the fact that maps are always political and the necessity of taking EVERYTHING you read in the newspapers with a grain of salt.
Heard him speak on This American Life about this book...sounds fascinating. Can't wait to get to it. I love the idea of mapping pumpkin faces or graffitti...sounds like poetry to me.
Curmudgeonly rant on how maps ALWAYS have an agenda. I probably would have been more impressed if I hadn't already read/heard/been immersed in similar discussions about bias in science.