Are Maps Objective or Subjective?
Please comment with your opinions regarding our class discussion on the objectivity and subjectivity of maps. Do you feel that maps are primarily and objective tool or is there some amount of subjectivity involved when maps are made? Should maps be entirely objective or does it help/hinder the user interpret the map easier when the mapmaker's subjective perspectives are included in the map? Provide a thoughtful comment to these questions and feel free to respond to others' comments as well. Along with answering these questions, find one map on the web and describe how this map may or may not introduce some subjectivity to the user. Provide the URL address to your map. Your answers will be graded!
8 comments:
I feel that maps are primarily an objective tool. A map is a reference source that needs to be clear, accurate, well designed, and complete for its intended users. A map that is poorly laid out, incorrectly scaled, too confusing or busy to read, or not drawn properly with incomplete symbols or a poor legend could get a person misdirected or lost while driving or hiking or not provide the information needed when searching for a specific location or collecting information. I think there should be no or very minimal subjectivity when making a map.
Maps should be entirely objective so users can rely on them to provide clear, consistent information. Maps should covey the same information or results to any user. A good map should not allow the user to misinterpret what is displayed.
Here is a URL to a very subjective, poorly designed map: http://adisneyworldsports.disney.go.com/media/dwws_v0220/en_US/pdf/TowerofTerror13KCourseMap1.pdf
This is a map intended to show the route for a 13 km run in Disneyworld. The mapmaker assumed the runners know the roadway names, direction, distances, landmarks, and where to turn, all of which are not shown on the map. For those not familiar with the area, without a scale, symbols, and a legend, the format and layout of this map is subjective and if used without help from others, will likely get runners lost or misdirected the first time.
I believe maps are, for the most part, subjective. The maps are usually designed for what the client needs. Since the extra information on a map may be nice, it may cost the client more time and money to obtain. Also, it may lead the client to spending more time to find their specific information.
This is a map of rivers in Alberta:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alberta_rivers.png
This was designed to spot just the rivers. There is no need for roads and highways since its designed specifically to show rivers. Its extra information that is not needed to convey the specific information.
I believe that a map is intrinsically a subjective form of communication. Regardless of how objective the information used to create the map is, the cartographers’ interpretation of the data is unique, and everyone who uses it is bound to that interpretation. The colours used, the symbols, and even the scale can influence the perception of the land being represented. Whenever there is human input to an objective situation, there is going to be subjectivity introduced. However, in order to maintain an accurate representation of what is being mapped, the cartographer should endeavour to keep his interpretation to a minimum.
This being said, there are times when giving an accurate representation of the place being mapped is not ideal. For example, the map found at http://www.ucalgary.ca/map/ is specifically for the use of navigating a university campus, and does not accurately depict the land. Rather, in order to maintain efficiency, it emphasizes landmarks and points of interest and there is no uniform scale.
Aaron Doucet said...
I believe that a map is intended to be an objective tool, but is not always found to be given that the creator a map commonly uses their own knowledge and skills to produce a map that is easy for the user to read.
Such subjective traits could be the coloring of the map, using brighter more dominant colors to focus the user in certain aspects of the map. Different fonts may indicate importance within an area of the map. In a map signifying land masses, different texture patterns can be used to show more rough or smooth terrain. In a form this is objective, but the choice of texture applied is made by the creator of the map implying that it is subjective.
In all forms, maps are made to be objective, but the ways in which they are made is often subjective simply because the creator uses their own creativity to make the map more aesthetically pleasing.
http://www.cambrianscove.com/Bluff-Trail.html
This map shows a hiking trail near Cambrian's Cove called The Bluff Trail. Objectively this map shops contour lines signifying the elevation changes in the area. But subjectively the creator used there own experience to choose details to show different terrain, towns, and coves to help the reader determine the path to hike.
Maps have a mixture of both subjectivity and objectivity when they are created.
Subjectivity means that the map was created and influenced on personal feelings. A map maker can be subjective when creating maps by their choice of colours, line types, or the way data and other information-perhaps in a title block, was displayed. In the movie that was played last class, it was mentioned that one of the old map makers did not even visit the land that he was drawing a map for. The map maker listened and believed the rumors that some parts of land were covered with cannibals, and he drew that on his map. This cannibal infested land could have potentially been a place that occupants of the land did not want anyone to go near, so they wanted to scare others away. This map was most likely not created with actual facts, so it was an example of a subjective map.
Today, maps have to have some objectivity, as the data on the map has to be correct and cannot be made up. If there are people surveying, it is challenging to get data to be influenced by the surveyor.
There is no correct way of creating a map, and the small details such as colours on a map make the map unique. It would be hard to get every map maker in the world to create their masterpieces the exact same way, so there should be some subjective individuality within drawings as long as the data is correct. Maps should be objective, and data should be correct, so the map user must be able to trust the information presented.
A map of the population distribution in the United States of America is shown below:
http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/2012/09/al-gore-latest-liberal-democrat-calling-for-end-of-electoral-college/usa-population-map/
The information as to where the majority of citizens in the USA live depicted on the map should be correct and objective. Subjectively, the map maker chose to place spikes at different levels to represent various populations in the country. The map maker was able to convey their message in a unique and effective manner.
While I think that all maps should ideally be objective, they will all contain some sort of subjectivity, depending on the what the task the mapmaker is creating the map for. While Jordan does bring up good points of objectivity for an ideal map, things are never ideal in the real world, and are always open to interpretations varying from person to person. Something such as the color red represents danger or caution in the western world (blood, stop signs, etc.). This contrasts to China, asit is used as a friendlier color representing luck. Ultimately it will come down to the audience, mapmaker and amount of freedom the creator has. When Mercator was making his maps in the video, he included an array of towns on the map of England and Scotland. What was the filter for a town to make it onto the map? Size? Amount of fame the lord had within the kingdom?
Even when the map from Mercator/Young? was published, the map was split along two pages to show that Scotland was a large mass, trying to sway the French that an army was capable of joining the Scots to take on and overthrow the Protestants of England.
The subjective/objective debate will always contain a little bit of bias, but how much is always up to the cartographer.
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/world_literacy_map_unhd_2007_2008.png
This map depicting the literacy levels around the world could have easily been modified to show Asia, Europe,and Africa on the left side. This could in turn, somewhat hide the illiteracy that plagues Africa, as it would be shifted off center, with the bright colors not front and center. The background could have also been changed to show more contrast to make the warmer colors of the reds and oranges have more of a *pop* for the reader. Because it wasn't I believe that the cartographer wanted to ensure that the striking colors were front and center.
Map always has both elements of objectivity and subjectivity.
Map creation is science and art :)
Science means all distances and point's coordinates should be precise. This is objective part of every map.
Art is a way of expression/visualization. What color had been chosen, where to place legend and scale bar is your way of thinking. Your way to express yourself. So it is subjective.
Addition:
Example of "art"-map - 1900 map of Paris: http://www.oldmapsofparis.com/map/1900
Post a Comment