In “The Material Map: Lewis Evans and Cartographic Consumer Culture, 1750-1775,” Martin Bruckner looks at the value of maps as material objects. So far, from previous readings, we’ve seen that maps are not only pictorial representations of space. They are also powerful symbols. Moreover they are not only symbols of power. In fact they do not only represent power. They exercise power.
Bruckner shows a different view on the role of maps. He regards them as material objects. From the second half of the 18th century an increase in the publication of maps has had a double meaning. On the one hand, serial publication of maps has made everyone more dependent on maps. In this sense, the power of maps have increased.
On the other hand, the same serial publication of maps has determined the mass emergence of standardized maps, and as a consequence maps started to loose value. Maps ceased to be works of art. They became commodities. They no longer represented the center of the universe (remember the fancy word “axis mundi”). They just occupied their places on the walls, along with clocks, paintings and other serial commodities.
Nevertheless, these standardized maps are not only decorations for interiors. They also have some value for the exterior. The point is that assembled together these material objects form the choir of modern “imagined communities.” [I guess everybody is aware of the fact that I did not invent the term “imagined communities”, so I do not need to explain it in a footnote]
I would think he would say that although they became commodities, their influence did not completely wane. The spread of maps and increased geographic literacy (as he would put it) helped maps shape our worldview.
I think we could be in danger of digressing into a Foucauldian discussion about how much they impact our sense of community. But I think it is at least worth thinking about. His study is of course periodized, and geographic education has changed. How much do maps and map literacy affect our sense of place now?
[…] far this week, I have commented with Alex about the affect of maps on our sense of […]
Now my mind is stuck on axis mundi….and I am picturing Teotiuhuacan and the Pyramid of the Sun. I feel like pre-Columbian civilizations used massive architectural structures such as this pyramid as maps that others would have understood to symbolize sacred places. Giant landmarks are great for telling people where to go, or…where not go. But anyways, I agree with you in that maps lost their artistic touch with an increase in standardized mapmaking. Also, it seems like most of the readings have dealt with maps as a power welding tool…do you think that with more standardized map forms and maps becoming a normal commodity that using maps to exert power has decreased?
[…] https://alesanu.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/maps-and-material-culture/#comment-96 […]
@armablue
Forgive me, but again I will not be original in stating that contemporary maps are innocent in form, but very powerful in content. In contrast with earlier artifacts, such as for example stone maps, contemporary serial maps are not so solid but they are more powerful, because they present a standardized vision of the world and they are widely distributed. This is not to say that viewers internalize them automatically. Still, the fact is that earlier it was relatively hard to find a map, and now they are everywhere.