![]() Developments in technology subsequently transformed the way maps were made, used and shared. This presented the idea that maps – like other texts – are not (and cannot be) value-free or neutral ( Perkins, 2017: 80). More fundamentally, as selective representations, the nature of maps means that they are never only about technology or design ( Kent and Vujakovic, 2017) and the cartographic communication paradigm was supplanted by the ‘epistemological shift’ of critical cartography (e.g. While their focus was on reaching a single, optimal map solution, a combination of their increasing complexity with a lack of agreement about the nature of their fundamental elements led to the demise of the cartographic communication models by the early 1980s. Moles, 1964 Board, 1967 Koláčný, 1969 Ratajski, 1971 Balasubramanyan, 1971 Petchenik, 1974 Robinson and Petchenik, 1975 Robinson and Petchenik, 1976 Board, 1977 Petchenik, 1977), which, in their simplest form, portrayed maps as ‘channels’ that transmitted information from a source (the world) to a recipient (map reader) ( Montello, 2002: 290). The paradigm saw the introduction of successive map communication models during the 1960s and 1970s (e.g. ![]() In particular, cartography was redefined as a communication science ‘as distinct from a rather unwieldy art-science relationship, regarded by many as an uncomfortable operating zone’ ( Sorrell, 1978: 31). ![]() In order to succeed under the post-war hegemony of modernism, cartography would therefore come to rely on the values of scientific inquiry, such as objectivity and empirical research, to provide its authority, purpose, and direction. The emergence of theories of cartographic communication after the Second World War, a conflict which had seen the proliferation of propaganda mapping and the erosion of trust in cartography, aimed to rationalize the process of map creation and to establish cartography as a scientific discipline. Cartography, which may be defined as the art, science and technology of making maps ( Kent and Vujakovic, 2017), gives meaning to spatial relationships and turns space into place. We have used maps for communicating our place in the world long before the development of written language (see, for example, Utrilla et al., 2009).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |