Culture · 6 pages · 12 min
How maps became arguments
A map's projection, center, and omissions are choices, and choices argue.
When the purchase is complete, return to the original window. It will refresh.
From the opening
Maps became arguments, in the sense critics use that phrase, when readers noticed that a map must choose a projection, a center, a scale, and a set of names and omissions, and that each choice advances a view of the world. The picture looks like the territory; the picture is a designed selection that makes some relations easy to see and others hard. The opening covers projection teaches a kind of size, center and north are chosen, and a solid color argues a solid state.
The rest of the brief — the later sections and the reading notes — opens after Stripe confirms payment.
Inside
- Projection teaches a kind of size
- Center and north are chosen
- A solid color argues a solid state
- Silences are part of the claim
- Where the idea stops applying
- A distinction worth keeping
Sources
- Mercator projection and area distortion
- Harley on maps as arguments and Mark Monmonier's How to Lie with Maps