What is Counter-Mapping?
Counter-mapping = critical cartography = subversive cartography = bioregional mapping = remapping = ethnocartography = alternative cartography = mapping-back = counter-hegemonic mapping = public participatory mapping
‘Counter-mapping’ is the map-making process whereby communities appropriate the state’s techniques of formal mapping and make their own maps as alternatives to those used by government (Nancy Peluso, 1995). Counter-maps become tools in the broader strategy for advocacy as they articulate community claims for rights over land. In addition to representing geographic information, counter-maps negotiate between central social, cultural and historical notions. Source: newmedialab.cuny.edu
There are numerous expressions closely related to counter-mapping: ethnocartography, alternative cartography, mapping-back, counter-hegemonic mapping, and public participatory mapping. Moreover, the terms: critical cartography, subversive cartography, bioregional mapping, and remapping are sometimes used synonymously with counter-mapping, but in practice encompass much more. Historically, cartography has been a fundamental governmentality strategy, a technology of power, used for surveillance and control. Source: en.wikipedia.org
1) Jeremy W. Crampton and John Krygier, “An Introduction to Critical Cartography,” ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 4:1 (2006): 11-33.
Jeremy W. Crampton and John Krygier defines critical cartography as a one-two punch of new mapping practices and theoretical critique. Critical cartography challenges academic cartography by linking geographic knowledge with power and thus, is political.
This journal explains what is critical cartography as counter-mapping by narrating the historical concept of critique as politics of knowledge. As mapping technology evolved by the evolution of digital technology, anyone can make a map that has an argument. In the past, only people with power were able to make, manipulate and distribute maps. Also, only governors and politician had a concrete geographical concept of the region that they control. Counter-mapping challenges the existing governors’ maps.
I didn’t know the meaning of “counter-mapping” itself, but through the readings, I became aware of the concept of counter-mapping as critical cartography, and it was interesting there were lots of political power structures behind map making process. Digital revolution and open source enable people to access to sources and make maps freely regarding image-making itself has power to influence other people.
2) Dee Morris & Stephen Voyce, “William Bunge, the DGEI, & Radical Cartography,”Jacket 2 (March 20, 2015).
4) Nancy Lee Peluso, “Whose Woods Are These? Counter-Mapping Forest Territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia,” Antipode 27:4 (1995): 383-406 [a hinge to next week’s discussion]
Forests are repositories of great wealth and ecological importance; politically, they are much more than that. Mapping of forest resources is, therefore, an intrinsically political act: whether drawn for their protection or production, they are drawings of a nation’s strategic space.
I have developed my thesis concept of “Wearable Data” so far and today I had an 1:1 meeting with David Caroll, my thesis professor.The meeting was inspirational to think more about critical matters within my project! My developed idea, from the original idea of “Wearable Data” which displays a wearer’s data on one’s cloth, is to create a wearable fashion which changes its color and pattern, reacting to a user’s emotion based on life data analyzed by a self-data dashboard.
As my thought and belief about “Quantified Self” has been changed, my idea changed its direction how to give emotional value into data visualization. I’m still struggling to the point about what I should convey through my thesis project or what I argue with it. He gave me advice that if I observe people’s interaction with my project and document it, It will convey “a story” that explains my thoughts and could be the argument itself.
Also, I’m coming up with some visual, conceptual identifiers that can clarify my project. I found those words had some relevances to each other.
Emotional – Emotional Data, Emotional Textile, Synesthesia, Emotional Dashboard
Individualism – Customized Electronic Fashion, Wearable Data, Self-recognition, Quantified Self
Tangible – Data Physicalization, Garment as an interface, Color Changing E-textile
Analytical – Fashion As A Self-data Dashboard, Quantified Self, Algorithm-baed Software
Through my previous design education and brand design experience, I’m pretty familiar with coming up with visual identifiers and adjectives that represent a concept and identity, but for me, It was harder to come up with reconfigurable attributes that deliver critical thinking aspects of it within conceptual, cultural and political contexts.
For the next steps, I will be observing people’s interaction with my idea and project as well as creating a more specific phrase by combining the identifying words that I came up with. It is going to be a reconfigurable attribute that is an essence of my project.
Also, I am going to document how my view toward quantification of self-data has been changed. It was impressed my professor mentioned that visualization itself has a power based upon designer’s arbitral choosing process for visual orders that affect people’s perception by framing their mind and changing their opinion. Specifically, what he said was that visualization in terms of picturing, ordering and representation can create some bias in viewer’s mind. As a designer who majored design and advertising, I agree all the designer visualization is for re-framing people’s view and even behavior like buying a product. It’s the design’s role and power but could be a negative power that generates concrete bias as well.
Because of my background in visual communication design and advertising and my preference to think visually, I have been always into visual communication and visual representation itself. So I think… broadly, I should include “Visual Thinking” as one of my research areas. I’m reading a book Visual Thinking by Colin Ware for a reference. In this book, the author takes what we now know about perception, cognition, and attention and transforms it into concrete advice that designers can directly apply. He demonstrates how designs can be considered as tools for cognition – extensions of the viewer’s brain in much the same way that a hammer is an extension of the user’s hand.
There has been a revolution in our understanding of human perception that goes under the name “active vision.” Active vision means that we should think about graphic designs as cognitive tools, enhancing and extending our brains. Although we can, to some extent, from mental images in our heads, we do much bettwe when those images are out in the world, on paper or computer screen. Diagrams, maps, web pages, information graphics, visual instructions, and technical illustrations all help use to solve problems through a process of visual thinking. We are all cognitive cyborgs in this Internet age in the sense that we rely hevily on cognitive tools to amplify our mental abilities.
After the meeting with the professor, I discussed this idea with my friend Andrew, and he mentioned that it will be interesting to use projection mapping to visualize data on the garment. I thought it would be a more flexible way to present the data, but It seems it doesn’t represent the concept of “Wearable Data” which means a garment (textile) as an interface.
I would say this is a creepy film that criticizes a data-obsessed life in line with a rise of Quantified Self, or self-tracking, or self-surveillance which posits a sort of truth in numbers and technology.
I have been fascinated by wearable devices like Fitbit, and I’m focusing on studying data visualization. So, I have been into the rising culture of “Quantified Self.” But what if it turns out it is a scary thought to measure our everyday life by numbers?
In Map As Media class of week 4, cognitive mapping, we practiced quickly how to create a cognitive map. “Cognitive Mapping” is a more about subjective mental representations of map-making.
A cognitive map (sometimes called a mental map or mental model) is a type of mental representation which serves an individual to acquire, code, store, recall, and decode information about the relative locations and attributes of phenomena in their everyday or metaphorical spatial environment. The concept was introduced by Edward Tolman in 1948. The term was later generalized by some researchers, especially in the field of operations research, to refer to a kind of semantic network representing an individual’s personal knowledge or schemas. (From Wikipedia)
Our group members’ majors varied as Urban Studies, Media Studies and Design and Technology(me). So our perception of the school building was different from each other. So we decided to map out how we experience the school building differently, and how the elevator system affects the way of experiencing the building. I sketched out a map through my perception toward school elevator system.
Some critical thoughts when drawing this map.
- Each size of floors is different based upon uses and importance in our group members’ cognition.
- Express elevators are only available to access to specific floors. It shapes our way to experience the school building.
The final map sketch is a bit crude, but it was a good exercise to know the key value of cognitive mapping. It’s a map that is shaped and visualized from our cognition, perception, and mental process as well as an Interesting thought process and a tool for critical thinking, and further, critical cartography.
Maps reveal, delineate, verify, orient, navigate, anticipate, historicize, conceal, persuade, and, on occasion, even lie. From the earliest maps in cave paintings and on clay tablets, to the predictive climate visualizations and crime maps and mobile cartographic apps of today and tomorrow, maps have offered far more than an objective representation of a stable reality. In this hybrid theory-practice studio we’ll examine the past, present, and future – across myriad geographic and cultural contexts – of our techniques and technologies for mapping space and time. In the process, we’ll address various critical frameworks for analyzing the rhetorics, poetics, politics, and epistemologies of spatial and temporal maps. Throughout the semester we’ll also experiment with a variety of critical mapping tools and methods, from techniques of critical cartography to sensory mapping to time-lining, using both analog and digital approaches. Course requirements include: individual map critiques; lab exercises; and individual research-based, critical-creative “atlases” composed of at least five maps in a variety of formats.
Fall 2016 Website (Course Blog)