DATA VISUAlIzATIon For DeSIgn ThInkIng

Data Visualization for Design Thinking helps designers make better maps. Treating maps
as applied research, you will be able to understand how to map sites, places, ideas, and
projects, revealing the complex relationships between representation, thinking, technology,
culture, and aesthetic practices. More than 100 examples illustrated with over 200 color
images show you how to visualize data through mapping. Includes five in-depth case
studies and numerous examples throughout.

Winifred E. Newman is professor and head of the department of architecture at the

University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA.
DATA VISUAlIzATIon For DeSIgn ThInkIng
Applied Mapping

Winifred e. newman
First published 2017
by routledge
711 Third Avenue, new York, nY 10017

and by routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, oxon oX14 4rn

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2017 Taylor & Francis

The right of Winifred e. newman to be identified as author of this work

has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. no part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or

utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or

registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

A catalog record for this book has been requested

ISBn: 978-1-138-95834-0 (hbk)

ISBn: 978-1-138-95835-7 (pbk)
ISBn: 978-1-315-66127-8 (ebk)

Acquisition editor: katharine Maller

editorial Assistant: Trudy Varcianna
Production editor: kevin Selmes

Typeset in Univers
by hWA Text and Data Management, london
For Michael, who makes all things possible
Contents

viii Foreword
x Preface
xi Acknowledgments
xii Figure Credits

1 Introduction

43 Chapter 1: Maps as Objects of Explanation

89 Chapter 2: Terms of the Map

138 Chapter 3: Maps as Power, Identity and Utopia

189 Chapter 4: Case Studies

264 Further reading

276 Index

vii
Foreword

An analogue to the spirit and function of the mapmaking endeavor, the subtitle of this book,
Applied Mapping, is as necessarily deceptive as its cartographic subject. recalling the work
of Mark Monmonier, this ambitious project to make mapping useful to designers of the built
environment finds virtue in the way maps lie by omission. For newman, this deception is
productive in that it foregrounds matters of selection and judgment which should be at the
heart of any design practice. Put another way, as the author suggests, a map that offers a
perfect representation of its cultural or geographic territory would be functionally useless
for the purposes of design, creative thought, and ultimately, world-making. As she writes,
‘the world is constantly revealing itself around us, but to see we must create a productive
gap between lived experience and our representations, not as mirrors hide our biases,
but as possible worlds we can knowingly choose to unfold.’ newman’s hypothesis here
is an optimistic one, aimed at effecting the theoretical scaffolding through which design
can assume greater agency in the production of alternative futures. The book is part
manifesto and part historical survey, but resists being collapsed into either genre. It is an
unapologetically operative document concerned as much with locating the structure that
enables the formation of representational method as it is with the comparative intelligence
and relative strength of the methods themselves. In short, it both is and performs like a map.
By newman’s estimation, we are all cartographic beings and we operate as mapmakers
regardless of whether or not we are conscious of the process. Mapmaking is like the scientific
method; it is like the act of thought itself. These metaphors are crucial to newman’s project,
yet they are capable of being more fully instrumentalized, or put to work. here, we see that
the ‘applied’ of the book’s subtitle refers not to an abstract set of rules which designers
can simply import to their work, but rather is a nod to the fact that maps are nothing if not
applied; that there can be no analysis without interpretation, or for that matter, creation.
Maps are never value-neutral or outside of the world of things which they work through and
reshape. For newman, the intellectual project of unmasking the logic of maps as subjective,
conscious projections into the world is but the first step toward coming to terms with the
ways in which our mapmaking facility can be used to produce a multitude of possible
worlds, each ideally more beneficent than those we currently inhabit.
This utopian claim is by no means a modest objective, nor is it without certain dangers,
and newman, steeped by training in the cautionary tales of Foucault and Baudrillard, seeks
a balanced approach throughout her text that suspends the question of privileging fact or

viii
 Foreword

fiction. And, though newman’s particular bias is to insist that we not lose sight of the ‘there,
there,’ or the real purpose which underwrites our efforts, her methods do not preclude a
journey into pure fantasy as a roundabout way to return to the factual world on radically
different terms. It becomes up to the mapmaker and the designer to exercise judgment in
that regard and to decide the most useful approach with respect to the situation. To take one
example, she argues that harold Fisk’s 1944 map of the Mississippi river for the U.S. Army
Corps of engineers is powerful less for its accuracy than for its suggestiveness in conveying
the dynamics of a fluvial system. Somewhat paradoxically, as a function of its symbolic
power, the fuzzy imprecision of one map is often valuable for the precision of the subsequent
observations, projects, and spin-offs it inspires—the local revisions, the specific political or
ecological challenges to its authority, or its wholesale replacement by a more convincing,
interesting, or usable alternative.
The perpetual testing of alternatives in the space between this world and the next one we
might imagine—‘somewhere between the real and the virtual, the probable and possible’—is,
for newman, a fundamentally cartographic endeavor, and by extension, the very activity of
life. This is the ethos of her pedagogical project as well and the book’s structure is indicative
of the approach she takes in the studio and the seminar room. here, song lyrics, observant
pop culture analysis and case studies drawn from the work of her students brush up against
projects and insights gleaned from a litany of critical thinkers from both inside and surrounding
the design disciplines. The book is an evocative hybrid offering readers a diverse array of
points into and out of the text. Some fragments more directly appeal to design students, while
others seek to supply design instructors with the frameworks and vocabularies through which
to reconceive of their practices and modes of instruction.
Across it all however, newman displays a method of investigation that quite literally
makes ‘use’ of its subjects as a way of turning use into the book’s primary subject. The spirit
here, however, is less one of appropriation than conversation as sources appear as fellow
interlocutors in a collective endeavor. At times channeling Colin rowe’s theorization of
collage, newman’s project complements and revises that architectural point of departure. It
updates the idea of collage in the twin sense of building upon and improving its capacity to
relate to evolving social and material conditions that fall outside the purview of the figure-
ground plan or the weight of place implied in the concept of genius loci. If the designer
or architect is to remain, or perhaps even truly evolve into a bricoleur, he or she would
need to develop the capacity to accommodate a staggering variety of historical precedents,
cognitive inputs, conflicting data sets, and cues from environments both virtual and physical.
For newman, the conscious study of the processes and techniques of mapping allows us
to confidently approach this uncharted territory with the knowledge that somehow we’ve
done this before and can do so again in more interesting and humane ways. newman’s
hypothesis, and the major contribution of this book, is its suggestion that how we go about
doing so is always twofold. It involves developing a new set of analytical tools capable of
bringing our maps into agreement with our intentions and desires, while also recognizing
that we should be open to the refashioning of the premises of those desires that may come
through our methodical engagement with the practices of mapmaking.
Felipe Correa
Associate Professor, harvard University graduate School of Design

ix
Preface

The goal of this book is to help designers working with built environments make better
maps. Using maps instrumentally in the design process enables designers to calibrate their
observations about site, place, idea and the parameters of a given project. Cartographers,
geographers, and cultural historians acknowledge existing frameworks for creating and
understanding relationships through the map began to change in the mid-twentieth
century. likewise in the disciplines that address built environments terms like zoning,
boundary condition, and master plan, typically represented through the map, no longer
adequately describe, catalogue, or represent what are now understood as complex,
culturally specific contexts, expectations about performance over time, and process and
information networks. new forms of mapmaking and new tools for representation allow
data-intensive maps to be assembled quickly and easily. When used as an applied research
method in design, mapping reveals a complex of relationships between representation and
thinking, technology, culture, and aesthetic practices. Preparing, cataloguing, weighting,
and reducing data to capture a productive representation of a condition is an important tool.
This book shares knowledge from multiple disciplines about cartographical thinking in order
to map potential scenarios for a synthetic understanding of a broad range of quantitative,
qualitative, and spatial data sets.

x
Acknowledgments

I owe much to the works of Mark Monmonier and Alan Maceachren on cartography,
J. B. harley, David Woodward and P. D. A harvey on histories of cartography, and Denis
Cosgrove, Denis Wood, Jon Pickles, Jeremy Crampton, Derek gregory, James Corner, and
Arthur h. robinson and Barbara Petchnik on cartographical thinking and contemporary
theories of mapping. Valuable critique and advice from Antoine Picon, k. Michael hays,
and hashim Sarkis sparked and informed the investigation into links between cartography
and spatial thinking in architecture. The idea for this project emerged in response to a
belief in the need for more robust mapping practices in the design disciplines. Maps are
potentially a methodological system for organizing experiential phenomenon and ideation
in a design process. Any errors or omissions in conveying these ideas are my own. It was
challenging to balance how to convey guides for making maps and theories that structure
map content, intent and use. The book draws from maps prepared by students for a series
of courses taught at Washington University in St. louis, harvard University, the University
of Tennessee and Florida International University. Special gratitude is extended to these
students whose work added significantly to the quality and depth of the maps in the book.
Their contributions to the ongoing discussion of the way spatial designers use maps
were invaluable. especially helpful with archival material was the library of Congress, the
Imperial War Museum, Fondazione MAXXI, lockheed Martin Corporation, MIT Press, the
royal Institute of British Architecture, Alice Debord, Akio kawasumi, eisenman robertson
Architects, and the gemeente Museum den haag. nicholas Wise, Sohee ryan and haley
Walton assisted with image editing and nicholas’s and Sohee’s wonderful diagrams are
seen throughout. Wendy Fuller, Trudy Varcianna and John hodgson guided me and the
book through publishing with great care. Support for the early stages of the book was
provided through a graham Foundation grant, Florida University International and harvard
University. Special thanks are due to the University of Arkansas and the office of research
and Special Projects. Their generous support made the final steps of the book possible.

xi
Figure Credits

Introduction
0.1: John nasmyth and James Carpenter, The Moon Considered as a Planet, a World and a
Satellite (1885), from the book collections of the new York Public library [Public domain],
Courtesy of the Internet Archive
0.2, 0.3, 0.4: B. W. Betts, Geometrical Psychology (1887) [Public domain], Francis A.
Countway library of Medicine via Medical heritage library
0.5: Francis Crick and James Watson, photo courtesy/Science & Society Picture library
0.6, 0.7, 0.17, 0.18: ernst haeckel, Kunstformen der Natur (1904) [Public domain], Courtesy
of WikiCommons
0.8: Image courtesy of Thunder Bay 2001, noAA-oer [Public domain]
0.9: Student, University of Tennessee
0.10: Student, Washington University in St. louis
0.11: Charles howard hinton, The Fourth Dimension (1904) [Public domain], Courtesy of the
Internet Archive, from Boston College library; blc; americana
0.12, 0.13: Étienne-Jules Marey [Public domain], © Cinémathèque française
0.14: C. lombroso, from L’Homme Criminal [Public domain], Courtesy of the Internet Archive
0.15: Joaquin Pineda, Florida International University
0.16: François Chauveau [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
0.19, 0.20: Patrick Abercrombie, London Plan: Social and Functional Analysis (1943) [Public
domain]
0.21: MArS group, Master Plan for London, courtesy of the rIBA
0.22, 0.23, 0.25, 0.26: Claude-nicolas ledoux, [Public domain], Courtesy of WikiCommons
0.24: Aerial photo, image © 2015 Digitalglobe [Public domain]
Diagram 0.1: nicholas Wise, University of Arkansas

Chapter 1
1.1: Brad Cooke, Washington University in St. louis.
1.2: Beatus of liébana, Locating the Garden of Eden, 1175—Wikicommons [Public domain]
1.3: École nationale des Ponts et Chussèes (enPC), 1792 Student map competition [Public
domain], via Antoine Picon, French Architects and Engineers in the Age of Enlightenment
1.4: gia Wolff, harvard University

xii
 Figure Credits

1.5: robert Fludd [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 1.12: evan Barrett, Washington University in St. louis
1.13: Étienne-Jules Marey [Public domain], Paris, Cinémathèque
1.14: emanuel Ferro, Florida International University
1.15: Joaquin Pineda, Florida International University
1.16: Priscilla Pagan, Florida International University
1.17: elisa kim, Washington University in St. louis
1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21: Samantha Stein, Washington University in St. louis
1.22: Colin Sieburg, harvard University
1.23: Anthony zephyr, Washington University in St. louis
1.24, 1.25: Mohammed hossain, harvard University
1.26: Map courtesy of the U.S. geological Survey [Public domain]
1.27, 1.28, 1.29, 1.30, 1.31: Atlas Mar, Florida International University
1.32: Marsha McDonald, Florida International University
1.33: hernan guerero Applewhite, Florida International University
1.34: o. h. Bailey et al. The City of Boston 1879. Boston, 1879. Map retrieved from the
library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/75694555/
1.35: Manuel lam, harvard University
1.36, 1.37: Valerie Michalek, Washington University in St. louis
1.38: Margaret Cooke, Washington University in St. louis

Chapter 2
2.1, 2.2: John Branigan (Azavea), North America in 8 Projections [Public domain]
2.3: harold Fisk, Geological Investigation of the Alluvial Valley of the Lower Missisissippi
River, 1944 [Public domain]
2.4, 2.5, 2.23, 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, 2.27, 2.28, 2.29, 2.30, 2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 2.34: Map courtesy of
the U.S. geological Survey [Public domain]
2.6, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.22, Diagram 2.5: nicholas Wise, University of Arkansas
2.7: Domenico remps [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
2.8: Joan Blaeu [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
2.9: Student, Washington University in St. louis
2.10: Student, University of Tennessee
2.11, 2.12: Maria lorena reyes Bahamon and Jennifer Sandoval, Florida International
University
2.13: eileen nunes koo and Aileen zeigen, Florida International University
2.14: Jean-Baptiste regnault [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
2.18: hans Vredeman de Vries, Perspektive, 1604 [Public domain]
2.19: By YY (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuyo/2284479415/) [CC BY 3.0
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
2.20, 2.21: Andrew Butler, Washington University in St. louis
2.35: Image courtesy of eisenman Architects, house X Project, 1975
2.36: Photo courtesy Digital Image © The Museum of Modern Art/licensed by SCAlA / Art
resource, nY

xiii
Figure Credits

2.37, 2.38, 2.39: Charles Joseph Minard [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
2.40: eduardo garcia, Florida International University
2.41, 2.42: Taejun James kim, Washington University in St. louis
2.43: The Evolution of the Web by hyperakt [Public domain]
2.44: Angelica Trevino, harvard University
2.45: hereford Mappa Mundi, courtesy of hereford Cathedral [Public domain]
2.46: Catty Dang zhang, Washington University in St. louis
2.47: Valerie Michalek, Washington University in St. louis
2.48: elisa kim, Washington University in St. louis
2.49: Michael Pope, Washington University in St. louis
2.50: Xi Chen, Washington University in St. louis
2.51: Alejandro Torres, Florida International University
2.52: kosuke Bando, harvard University
Diagrams 2.1–2.4: Author

Chapter 3
3.1, 3.44, 3.45, 3.46: Betty ng, harvard University
3.2: Thomas More
3.3: Aerial photo, Image © 2015 Digitalglobe [Public domain]
3.4: Angelica Trevino, harvard University
3.5: Yunhee Min, harvard University
3.6: Margaret Cooke, Washington University in St. louis
3.7, 3.8, 3.11: kosuke Bando, harvard University
3.9: o. h. Bailey et al. The City of Boston 1879. Boston, 1879. Map retrieved from the library
of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/75694555/
3.10: Constant nieuwenhuys (1920–2005), Symbolic representation of New Babylon, 1969,
collage of city maps. 120 × 133 cm, Collection gemeentemuseum Den haag. Photo Tom
haartsen for Fondation Constant
3.12: By Strebe (Mobile Traffic Monetization) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
3.13: By Strebe (own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
3.14, 3.15, 3.16, 3.18, 3.19, 3.20: Photo courtesy of Akio kawasumi
3.17: Banque d’Images, ADAgP / Art resource, nY
3.21: Aerial photo, Image © 2015 Digitalglobe
3.22: herman Mao, Washington University in St. louis
3.23: netherlands Institute for Art history, Archive Constant (0095), inv.nr. 488,
Psychogeographic Map of g. e. Debord, Guide Pschogeographique de Paris. Use of map
courtesy of Alice Debord
3.24, 3.43, Diagrams 3.1, 3.2: Author
3.25: Camouflage of lockheed Aircraft Company, Burbank, CA, c. 1945, Image courtesy of
lockheed Martin Corp
3.26: Aerial image of lockheed Aircraft Company in camouflage, Burbank, CA, c. 1945

xiv
 Figure Credits

3.27: rocklea, (DAVA-USArmy) [Public domain]

3.28: Faux-Paris, Adoc-photos / Art resource, nY
3.29: Bombing diagram [Public domain]
3.30: By printmaker Frederick Birnie, after robert and henry Aston Barker [Public domain],
via Wikimedia Commons
3.31: Aquatint by henry Aston Barker, after robert Barker (http://www.gac.culture.gov.uk/
work.aspx?obj=29586) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
3.32: robert Mitchell, Plans and Views in Perspective (1801) [Public domain] via Stephen
oetermann, The Panorama History of Mass Media, zone Books, new York, 1997: 104
3.33: Courtesy of British Museum [Public domain]
3.34: Jeremy Bentham [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
3.35, 3.36, 3.37: erin Dorr, Washington University in St. louis
3.38: Carolina rivera and Jessica Dickinson, Florida International University
3.39: new Plan of rome interpreted by Piero Sartogo, Constantino Dardi, Antoine grumbach,
James Stirling, Paolo Portoghesi, romaldo giurgola, robert Venturi, Colin rowe, Michael
graves, robert krier, Also rossi, leon krier. Courtesy of MAXXI Museo nazionale delle arti
del XXI secolo, rome. MAXXI Architettura Collection. roma Interrotta Archive
3.40: giovanni Battista nolli [Public domain]
3.41: nolli: Plate XIII, Colin rowe, Peter Carl, Judith di Maio, Steven Peterson, MAXXI Museo
nazionale delle arti del XXI secolo, rome. MAXXI Architettura Collection. roma Interrotta
Archive
3.42: Colin rowe, L’Aventino l’Orto Botanico, Courtesy of MAXXI Museo nazionale delle arti
del XXI secolo, rome. MAXXI Architettura Collection. roma Interrotta Archive
3.47: Image, Plykin attractor, courtesy of Yves Coudene, University of Western Brittany,
Department of Mathematics

Chapter 4
4.1: lysa Janssen, harvard University
4.2: Filippo Calandri, Trattato di Arithmetica (1491–92) [Public domain], published in
Florence by lorenzo Morgiani and Johannes Petri, 1
4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.22: Author
4.6: Sohee ryan, University of Arkansas (after Trachtenberg)
4.7: Sohee ryan, University of Arkansas (after Paronchi)
4.8: Piazza della Signoria [Public domain], Photo courtesy of JoJan—own work, CC BY-SA
3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=431779
4.9: Author (after evans)
4.10, 4.11: Author (after kemp)
4.12: Sohee ryan, University of Arkansas (after kemp)
4.13: Piero della Francesca, De Prospectiva Pingendi (1472–75) [Public domain], Size cm.
22 × 29.5
4.14: Florence Dome (WgA), View up (Bjorn S., Flickr, 2013), Panorama (Andy hay, Flickr,
2013)
4.15: San Spirito, Florence, Photo courtesy of WgA

xv
Figure Credits

4.16: San Minato al Monte, © Vanni Archive / Art resource, nY

4.17: Sohee ryan, University of Arkansas
4.18, 4.19: nehemiah grew, Anatomy of Plants, 1682 [Public domain], Courtesy of Missouri
Botanical garden via the Internet Archive
4.20: rené Descartes, ‘Vortices,’ from Principia Philosophiae, (1644) [Public domain]
4.21: Author with Sarah kellerman
4.23: Digital Image © The Museum of Modern Art/licensed by SCAlA / Art resource, nY
4.24: erich lessing / Art resource, nY
4.25, 4.26: Sara Johnson, Washington University in St. louis
4.27: Auguste Choisy, Palatin [Public domain], Courtesy of Colloque Centenaire Auguste
Choisy
4.28: Michael Schwartz, Washington University in St. louis
4.29, 4.30: lysa Janssen and Author, harvard University
4.31, 4.32: lysa Janssen, harvard University
4.33, 4.34: Daniel Alonso, Florida International University
4.35, 4.37, 4.38, 4.39: Siliang Fu, Washington University in St. louis
4.36: eric gaba, Dymaxion map [Public domain], Courtesy of Wikipedia Commons
4.40, 4.41, 4,42, 4.43, 4.44, 4.45, 4.46: gia Wolff, harvard University
4.47, 4.48, 4,49: raymond Chau and ruogu liu, Washington University in St. louis
4.50: Feixion Yu, Washington University in St. louis
4.51: Students, Florida International University
4.52, 4.53, 4.54, 4.55, 4.56: Vipavee kunavichayanont, harvard University
4.57: Maria Ines Aragon, Marsha McDonald, Veronica requeña, Florida International
University
4.58: kristen Argalas, Viviana restrepo, Fannie Torres, Florida International University
4.59, 4.60: Brendan Willis, Washington University in St. louis
4.61: Tokaido dochu ezo byobu, a panorama of the Tokaido road from edo to kyoto to
osaka, seventeenth century, courtesy of the C. V. Starr east Asian library University of
California, Berkeley
4.62, 4.63: D. Appleyard, k. lynch and J. r. Myer, The View from the Road, drawings, ©
1965 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, by permission of The MIT Press
4.64, 4.67, 4.68, 4.69, 4.70: Melissa Blair, Washington University in St. louis
4.65: Photographer not identified. official photograph [Public domain], via Wikimedia
Commons, photograph Q 43387 Courtesy of the Imperial War Museums (collection no.
2500-06)
4.66: ‘Dazzle camouflage effect’ [Public domain], Diagram by Ian Alexander—own work, CC
BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46167419

xvi
Introduction

not only is it easy to lie with maps, it’s essential.

Mark Monmonier1

Mapping as Thinking-Mediating-Making
The objective of the book is to theorize the practice of mapmaking for designers by
providing designers with the structure, grammar, and syntax for maps and mapping
procedures. Mapping and mapmaking emerge as ubiquitous modes of thinking in the last
twenty years—you don’t have to look far in any discipline to find a map. harder to find is a
literature addressing how to use maps as tools in design. one problem is maps are familiar:
the naturalness in the way we read them obscures their complexity as representations.
Artist Stanley Brouwn invoked the familiarity of the map in a provocative project done over
a two-day period in Amsterdam (1961). Brouwn randomly selected people on the street
and asked them for directions. he offered them paper on which to draw their responses
and sometimes they took him up on this, sometimes not—later he would stamp ‘This Way
Brouwn’ on the sheet of paper. ‘As they were drawing, people talked,’ Brouwn explains,

at times they talked more than they drew. on the sketches we can see what the people
were explaining. But we cannot see what they have omitted, because they had trouble
realizing what might be clear to them still requires explanation.2

Using maps as communication tools masks their complexity as a mode of thinking. Maps act
like language: we attribute the signs or marks in the map to a natural extension of thought. But
post-structuralism exposed maps (like language) as artificial signs whose meaning is tethered
to time, place, culture, gesture, smell—in short, a plethora of cognitive and phenomenal
attributes of our communication ecology. Mikhail Bakhtin uses a lovely term for the primacy
of context over text—heteroglossia. equal significance is given to the nature of the utterance
and the way words are aware of and mutually reflect other words—words live in seas filled
with the ebb and flow of all other words. As part of a communication ecology maps employ
cartographical thinking in excess of mere representation. In a similar way to the passers-by
in ‘This Way Brouwn’ whose marks and words created a seamless continuity to the degree

1
Introduction

they could not ‘see’ the gap between what they said and what they drew. The book examines
maps in the context of the cartographic imagination and its expression through the form of
the map used: ichnographic, cognitive, or photogrammetric. The attention is on mapmaking
as a strategy for calibrating the gap between observations about territory, idea, or object and
their representation so designers develop informed hypothesis in design.
Mapmaking begins with an observation or set of observations. observations are made in
a detached mode where you think about a subject—it becomes object—aware of the act of
standing separate from the object of thought. When fashioned as maps, observations trace
the mapmakers’ ‘thoughts about thinking’ and the object of thought. Consider the primal
perception of the infant received as a singular object with many parts—infants don’t perceive
themselves separate from the world around them. Their lived experience is an undifferentiated
world. It is with maturation and social communication the demand for categories arises: red
is a color, cows are animals, our earth is a round thing and so forth. But unlike infants we are
caught in our own subjectivity. Maps isolate parts of reality from the whole of reality without
fully disrupting originary relationships—allowing us to slip between whole/part, object/subject,
point/field, or identity/non-identity on a continuum rather than closed sets or categories
necessarily defined by contrasts. Instead of thinking of the map as an objective tool, I propose
it more as a phenomenon of perception albeit one cloaking itself in positivist respectability.
For my purposes the maps included in the book move outside of representations
historically considered maps to architectural representations, spatial models of data
surfaces, abstract analytical models, eighteenth- and nineteenth-century artifacts like
panoramas and dioramas, military camouflage, photographs and cinematic images, film
and videos. histories of cartography privileging terrestrial or geospatial maps were until
recently predominantly oriented towards the West and mostly promoted an underlying
progressive determinism: map accuracy, correspondence and detail improves as our
technologies of measurement make it possible.3 I don’t assume the same approach but look
instead at spatial organizations implied by the construct in the map—like the spatial order of
the itinerary mapped in the Tabula Peutingeriana, a thirteenth-century map of roman troop
movements copied from a map dating to the fourth or fifth centuries, compared to recent
itinerary maps by students. This book isn’t a history of cartography although it includes a
number of historical maps. It is an epistemology of spatial thinking invoking the map as a
representational modality for communicating geospatial thinking.
recent histories of cartography by J. B. harley, The New Nature of Maps, Martin Dodge,
rob kitchin and Chris Perkins, Rethinking Maps, Denis Cosgrove, Mappings, David Turnbull,
Maps are Territories: Science is an Atlas, and John Pickles, A History of Spaces suggest
a move away from the tendencies mentioned above, but only Pickles considers scientific
graphical indices, models and simulations, geometric drawings by architects and designers,
panorama, diorama, and analytical mathematical models as maps.4 Volume 2, Book 3, in
the History of Cartography series edited by David Woodward and Malcolm lewis entitled
Cartography in the Traditional African, American, Arctic, Australian and Pacific Societies5
classifies categories of non-Western spatial thought and expression and divides these into
processes (thought and performance) and products. Thought characterized as cognitive
cartography includes organized images like spatial constructs. Performance, specifically

2
 Introduction

performance cartography, includes non-material ephemera like gesture, ritual, song, and
dance and material things, models and sketches. Products mean any record of a material
cartography from rock art to recordings of performance maps. Woodward and lewis open
the door and throw a broader net, but as Pickles notes,

recent reopening of the canon to the cognitive, as well as the diversity of material
products embodying those mappings, even more sharply highlights the limits of
traditional cartographic thought.6

Pickles develops the social instrumentality of the map as a practice and discourse ‘naming
the world’ territorializing socio-politico-economic regions and regimes of power. Chapter 3
addresses this issue in utopian maps for the design fields. My goal is furthering mapping
practices enabling designers to hypothesize new conditions, cognitive approaches, and
perspectives. Multiple intersections occur between cartography, social history, psychology,
philosophies of science and technology, and the engineering cultures of architecture including
landscape, interior, and urban architecture. Unpacking the epistemic cultures of representation
in mapmaking and reading foregrounds productive dialogue between these disciplines. The
subject can’t be dealt with comprehensively in one book but I’m hoping to convey in part how
geospatial thinking predicts the kinds of geographies we make and inhabit.
The structure of the book is itself a map. reading it means looking carefully at text and
comparing maps. The maps bear careful examination revealing rich layers of information
only on close examination. A number of maps are redrawn from the original to improve
legibility or highlight specific qualities. The book outlines general principles governing
how maps are made. When applied to specific problems these yield an infinite number
of possible maps. The maps in the book cover varied cultures, places, and times from
maps made by renaissance cartographers to maps by students in architecture, urban
design, and landscape architecture. A note to the reader—my intention is not to offer
instruction in software or graphics. A few of these resources are given as additional reading,
but in the main a plethora of books addressing the mechanical construction of maps are
readily available and provide an interested reader software instruction or domain-specific
techniques for managing effective graphics.

Visualizing
A brief explanation of the term visualization, especially regarding its relation to maps and
mapping, before we proceed. In the broadest sense visualization is the power or process
of forming a mental picture or vision of something not actually present to sight. The Oxford
English Dictionary (OED) definition indicates visualization is a relatively recent addition (1883)
coinciding historically with advent of the tools, instruments, and processes making things
visible.7 For example, psychology made human thought visible, x-rays and echo-sounding
visualize otherwise hidden structures within the body, and for the english psychologist
and psychic researcher edward gurney visualizing meant seeing images of the psychical
unconscious as apparitions after death. Maps and mapping are special technologies ‘making
visible.’ The OED includes a note applying this to ‘chiefly numerical’ information, but with

3
Introduction

maps this isn’t the only content. Maps include experiential, non-quantifiable, and qualitative
information. Cognitive maps are one type exemplifying this notion. Say you make a map
for a friend giving them directions to your home, you would probably use a combination
of lines representing roads, arrows to show direction and significant landmarks—‘turn right
when you see the big brick building’ or ‘take a left at the fast food place.’ on the face of it this
looks like quanta—measurable information about how to move toward a goal (in this case,
your house), but a second look will reveal this is your interpretation of this path—someone
else may have noticed different landmarks or different signs. As your cognitive map, it is
data generated from your subjective and personal experiences.
orit halpern in Beautiful Data reminds us ‘vision’ is a term that ‘multiplies—visualizations,
visuality, visibilities’ and these

permutations of the term ‘vision’ demonstrate vision can’t be simply the isolated sense
of vision but must be, following Walter Benjamin, a technical condition—and, following
Foucault, what makes the organization of the senses critical to understanding the
tactics of governance and power at any historical moment (emphasis mine).8

Visualization is defined as process and object, epistemology, subject and discipline—all

terms equally applicable to maps and mapping. Data visualization is a mapping or mental
construct using instruments and technologies for ‘seeing’ what isn’t apparent in a place,
object, or idea, but could be if we make a map.

Maps versus Mapping

A quick discussion of current theory in maps and mapping provides general insight into
the terminology. Making a map is the physical production including conceptualization and
design. Mapping is the mental interpretation of the world and although it must precede the
map, it does not necessarily result in a map artifact.9 Mapping defined in mathematics is
the correspondence between each element of a given set with each element of another.
Similarly in linguistics emphasis is on the correspondence between associated elements of
different types. For designers all drawings are maps—they represent relationships between
objects, places and ideas. Cartographers Arthur robinson and Barbara Petchenik offer that,
‘A map is a graphic representation of the milieu.’10 The key word is ‘representation’ because
it emphasizes map-representations are separate from the reality they describe. It seems
obvious but mapping, as the mental interpretation of the world, and mapmaking are easily
confused. Implicit in most assumptions about mapping is that physical space and intellectual
space overlap so maps become surrogates of space. As robinson and Petchenik write:

As we experience space, and construct representations of it, we know that it will

be continuous, everything is somewhere, and no matter what other characteristics
objects do not share, they always share relative location, that is, spatiality; hence the
desirability of equating knowledge with space, an intellectual space. This assures an
organization and basis for predictability, which are shared by absolutely everyone. This
proposition appears to be so fundamental that apparently it is simply adopted a priori.11

4
 Introduction

Although the idea of maps as intellectual space continues to resonate, the notion the
same cognitive or intellectual frame is shared by ‘absolutely everyone’ doesn’t. The
idea of ahistorical or transcultural categories implied by the forms of the map is since
problematized by the mapping community. harley and Woodward argue maps regardless
of look or form are expressions of human experience and therefore highly particular; they
are more than simply vehicles for communication but historically contingent. In Volume
I of the massive History of Cartography, harley and Woodward adopt a new definition of
the map in order to include maps outside of the traditional Western-centric canon: ‘maps
are graphic representations that facilitate a spatial understanding of things, concepts,
conditions, processes, or events in the human world.’12 John Pickles calls for an even
greater range of possible practices considered as maps from experiential to cognitive
to spatial analytics including spatial models of economic surfaces such as Von Thunen’s
analytical models.13 The idea maps are socially contingent does not mean they are a matter
of personal choice, but as Pickles notes this is a matter of ‘pre-existing and changing forms
of identification, categorization, and typification transforming and reworking structures of
meaning and identity and their corresponding spaces.’14 This is not unlike the way adaptive
re-use changes the typological meaning and signification of architectural spaces. The
analogous intellectual structures represented by architecture representations only heighten
the comparison between mapmaking and hypothesis-making in design.
Cartographers Arthur robinson and Barbara Petchenik pointed to the need for theorizing
maps and mapping in their seminal book The Nature of Maps (1976): ‘Mapping is based on
systems of assumptions, on logic, on human needs, and on human cognitive characteristics,
very little of which has been recognized or discussed in cartography.’15 They argued a
thorough understanding of the cognitive character of the map was not nearly so important
earlier as maps were relatively simple. Chapter 1 tackles issues pertaining to how maps act
as objects of explanation including maps as text and image and the way maps as social
and technical artifacts contribute to our shared cognitive experience of the world. I look at
maps made by architects at the end of this chapter and utopian maps projecting possible
worlds in Chapter 3. Increasingly designers are making complex maps and mapping more
complex conditions using software and hardware linking digital and physical space in new
and exciting ways. however, computer programs are products of human thought and the
‘analytical and intuitive effort needed to produce successful maps’ can only increase.16
Chapters 2 and 4 expand the idea of mapping and mapmaking for designers and share a
methodology tested over the course of six years in design studio and a seminar on applied
mapping. In Chapter 1 we look in depth at the problematic of the map as ‘cultural practice’ in
a post-representational cartography. The terms map and mapping move across disciplines
acquiring varied definitions and applications. The question of instrumentalizing mapping in
visual design isn’t easily answered and will only be available to the reader after some trial
and error making maps of his or her own. Throughout the book are examples of maps made
by students, by cartographers, geographers and countless others known and unknown
throughout the long history of maps. There are map examples ranging from pre-history
to very recent examples. Maps pre-dating written language in human evolution are found
in the caves of lascaux as a series of dots mapping sections of the night sky. Mapmaking

5
Introduction

technology changes but surprisingly, maps from the seventh millennium bc and modern era
share similar constructs.
The advent of the computer in the 1970s increased data quantity and type and production
in maps shifted accordingly. There was increasing use of thematic cartography allowing
for the representation of abstracted and nonvisual phenomena and the post-structuralist
‘spatial turn’ implicating the relationship between ideas and the spatial context in which
they are formulated and received.17 This affected designers indirectly, but significantly.
historically designers used maps to describe conditions of place: road maps, site maps
of various types like pedestrian routes, building types, and locational or environmental
conditions of place. Until the introduction of the figure/ground map by Colin rowe, maps
used by designers tended to ideal representations of places. Figure/ground or gestalt
maps show buildings as figures in white and context in black. Used to represent urban
plans this map type created a visual contrast between building and ground underscoring
the continuity of the spaces between buildings. The gestalt map contested the building
as object instead creating continuity between building and space. In the 1980s Peter
eisenman, using French theorist Jacques Derrida, explored the mapping procedure
to manage buildings as narrative. The process resulted in site maps with a variety of
imposed grids articulating different narratives according to survey information, historical
conditions, and other types of data. Buildings were extruded from the palimpsest created
by these superimpositions. For eisenman the plan-map acts as commentary or exegesis
on the geographical location through the map-texts referencing the history of the site.
These examples suffice as an introduction to mapping and maps. They demonstrate the
relatively new mode of hypothesis-making using maps, however if the number of recent
books on maps, graphics for maps and software used to produce them is any indication,
maps are quickly becoming a significant representational technology in the design arsenal.
Cartographic ideation, or what Derek gregory called the ‘geographical imagination,’ changes
with the technologies used to produce maps, but many of the inherent structures of visual
analogues for the world persists throughout the history of maps.18 The geographical imagination
links the social and technological to the ‘world-as-exhibition’ where our representations of the
world act in the place of unmediated seeing. gregory proposes practices like mapping are
part of a larger epistemology of representation influencing how we see the world through
the lens of national boundaries, perspectival grids, the division of lands into parcels, practices
of camouflage and surveillance and place names. John Pickles includes our recent practices
remapping all aspects of social life. he reminds us maps emerged as a tool or technology
embedded in the practices and institutions determining how we live our daily lives:

(Maps) are a way of cataloguing the ‘important’ (and ignoring the ‘unimportant’) features
of the earth’s surface and the social world; a way of accounting for the resources,
objects and public infrastructure of the earth’s surface; and a tool for the representation
and territorialization of space (emphasis in original).19

A single map can’t describe a territory, or to say it differently: there isn’t a single way
to imagine a given place, idea, or thing through the map. Producing and reading maps

6
 Introduction

is part of a cartographic imaginary, as Pickles terms it, proliferating spaces and the
way we see them. Maps are social inscriptions producing a spatial identity.20 looking
at maps specific to their use in design offers a window into spatial identities created
by architects, landscape architects, interior designers and urban designers working in
different periods using various technologies engaged across differing arenas of agency.
geographical imagination is our socio-spatial projections of self and society in terms of
our collective psychology of space. Mapping produces spatial practices as it inscribes
geographical places or conceptual ideation. limiting how we use maps in effect limits our
capacity to think about places and ideas through the map. Franco Farinelli proposes our
capacity for rationality itself may be determined from a cartographical point of view: the
grapheme lies at the heart of our capacity for reasoned thought. In effect we possess a
cartographical reason enabling us to project ourselves into geographical space.21 James
Corner proposed maps are ‘unfolding potential.’ The function of maps is not to depict
but to enable; ‘mappings do not represent geographies of ideas; rather they effect
actualization’ (original emphasis). The map is remaking a territory over and over again—
as such their agency isn’t in their reproduction, but in ‘uncovering realities previously
unseen or unimagined’22—hypothesis enacting as much as making.
The map is one possible representation of space and an organizer of knowledge in
space. Another way to consider the problem is using an example from language. This
isn’t outside the pale. Chorley and haggett remind us that, ‘It is characteristic that maps
should be likened to languages and scientific theories … we sometimes think of maps
as models for languages and scientific theories.’23 however, language severs the object/
word relationship in a particular way bearing examination. Maps and language share
many structural attributes but the distinctions are significant: words stand in for objects
so we bring to mind their referents. once the link between word and object is created
the sign itself is effectively severed from the object. To paraphrase kenneth Burke, ‘What
is the representation of what?’24 An illustration of the problem from Burke’s ‘dramatism’
proposes we treat language as a kind of action mediating between the social realm and
the realm of nonverbal nature—an elaboration on Spinoza’s insistence things must be
understood in their overall context instead of treating words as ontologically real entities.
Burke offers a linguistic model where things are the signs of words. Thus he gives an
example sentence, ‘The man walks down the street.’ What man? Is he tall, short, fat,
blond? Is this a walking-situation, a street-situation, a man-situation? The sentence as
stated cannot be illustrated. language falls short of the spatial problem where maps
may fall short of language’s capacity for brevity—‘the man walks down the street’ takes
significant time to map, but little effort to say. Just as language delineates the temporal
ordering of our intellectual or cognitive process, the spatial ordering of the map confirms
our assumptions about relative locations of objects and ideas in context and informs the
structure of the context.
Questioning the structure of the context opens up a way to recapitulate the ontology
of the map. If maps aren’t mirrors of nature but as Pickles argues, ‘producers of nature,’
their status as representations is itself in question. For Pickles, maps and cartography don’t
simply explain the world—they are part of the ‘interplay between the world and ourselves’

7
Introduction

describing the world exposed to us through our questions. rob kitchin and Martin Dodge
pushed the theory of maps to the limits of the ontology where maps aren’t treated as unified
representations but constellations of ongoing processes.25 These are the social, political,
scientific and technological worlds in which maps are made and received. This moves the
focus of the map away from representation and allows us to re-conceptualize the map as
cultural practices involving action and affects.26

Image or Representation
I would like to foreground the following with a caveat about the general status of maps as
representations. Without contradicting the notion maps register give and take between
culture and perception, the ‘interplay between the world and ourselves’, what matters is the
specific nature of the representational model of creating and receiving what is mapped—
what registers on the visual schema of the map. First, we need to interrogate the ontological
status of images and representations. Images as artifacts reproduce, duplicate or copy the
aspect, form or character of another object.27 The usage in english is from old French, himage,
originally from the classical latin imagin, imago, sharing the same roots with the english
imagine. The man in the street would most likely not make a great distinction between image
and representation—on the surface, images, like representations, share the notion of artificial
imitation or the re-presentation of something, but where image offers a sense of the idea of
imitation (lat. imitatio) or copy, representation is more about denoting symbolically, as in a
symbol or sign, or the action of portraying a person or a thing.28 The difference is instructive
for maps. Borrowing from the way historians of science manage discussions of the difference
suggests where the image suppresses its rhetorical purpose by relying on imagination and
distance; images are ‘A mental representation of something (esp. a visible object) created
not by direct perception but by memory or imagination; a mental picture or impression; an
idea, conception (emphasis mine).’ A representation is ‘a mental image or idea regarded as
an object of direct knowledge and as the means by which knowledge of objects in the world
may indirectly be acquired.’29 ronald giere emphasizes the context of use is paramount in
representations: ‘S uses C to represent W for purposes of P.’30 Where use encompasses a
wide range of different factors: the intention of the creator, the coding conventions extant
in the community, the way in which an audience or viewer takes it, the ways in which the
representing object is displayed, and so forth. As Sauer and Scholl underscore:

the context of use also determines the selective choices made in the presentation. The
ways in which representations are selective are hence not arbitrary but systematically
dependent on the context-specific relations between user, representation, and
represented.31

The mechanics of creating representations versus images determines if these levels of

consideration register in the structure of the content being conveyed.
Discussing the status of the photograph is instructive. Photographs can be either images
or representations. In early photography the realistic portrayal of subjects seemed to capture
what our eyes see—photos look enough like the thing photographed that they can be taken

8
 Introduction

as duplicates, hence images. With little work, manipulation or distortions created in taking
or processing photographs produces clearly not-real photographs, like panoramic views
physically impossible for us to experience. These exceptions prove the rule: photographs
are representations or simulations of what we ‘see’ with rules of construction depending
on the contexts discussed: what lens is used, who takes the photograph, the way it is
displayed, received and catalogued.32 Photographs when used as maps often have captions
and are positioned in relation to other images and text. Brian Molyneaux, theorizing the way
photography is used in archeology, goes so far to suggest we make distinctions between
photographs and photoworks, recognizing that photographic techniques bring into question
the notion of representation as finding some correspondence with an exterior reality where
‘reality’ is to be put in quotation marks.33
Maps as representations operate in much the same way. Maps re-present artifacts
and their milieu from within specific reception modes. geographic and chorographic
maps highlight this difference. geographic maps are primarily terrestrial maps describing
land features in a planimetric configuration based on euclidean geometric ordering. The
receptive mode is rational and distant. Chorographic maps, in contrast, convey a limited
knowledge of the topography of the earth but convey cultural context focusing on individual
parts, the qualities not quantities associated with a condition.34 geographic maps require
some cartographic knowledge on the part of the viewer where chorographic maps are
pictorial and present features of a place to the viewer in perspectival views more like
tourist maps. Studying tourism in Bangkok, Thailand, Stephen hanna and Vincent Del
Casino turn specifically to tourist maps to understand this mode of reception.35 They argue
visitors must use tourist maps in the context of other texts, narratives like guided tours, and
conversations with strangers to ‘read’ back into the map; rendering it legible as more than
color, lines and graphics. The tourist is both consumer and producer of space where ‘maps,
spaces and identities as interrelated processes rather than final products.’ Using identity
and post-structuralist theories from Deleuze, guattari and Judith Butler they show maps are
‘intertextual,’ meant to be used in the presence of a broad range of existing representations
of the place being mapped, social histories, and personal perceptions: a ‘map space.’36 Map
space is the unbounded, changing space of the map produced by social actors using the
map. Del Casino and hanna remind us these spaces must remain ambiguous because any
attempt to ‘fix oppositional categories, boundaries and other meanings is always partial.’
Ambiguity is what makes map space so potent for a designer. Map space becomes the
interactive mode of production and reception for the representation of spatial relations,
ideas, or things in the design process.37

Diagram, Image, or Map?

The conventions of mapping also apply to other kinds of data. Data visualization or
information analysis use principles and representational strategies of mapping to systematize
information of various kinds: proteins in gene mapping, neurons in brain mapping, human
perceptions of spatial configurations in cognitive mapping. Cultural geographer Denis
Cosgrove differentiates maps and mapping: the latter once understood as a weak synonym
for cartography is more recently defined through process, specifically the process of

9
Introduction

0.1
This remarkable map compares
the surface of an aging hand
with a shriveled apple to
illustrate the origin of ranges
on the moon resulting from
the shrinkage of the interior.
Produced by an engineer and a
gentleman amateur astronomer
it didn’t propose a new theory,
but underscored a popular
belief held at the time that lunar
craters are volcanoes. This
coincided with a hypothesis
that the same geologic forces
shaping Earth formed the Moon.
Beyond the wonderful map
comparing ‘how things age’ with
the similar-looking surface of the
moon, additionally they made
meticulous clay models of the
moon then photographed them
creating a simulacra of being
shot on the moon. It was only
projection.38 Mapping as act creates, visualizes, and conceptualizes a possible situation as when the first moon mission
landed, most astrophysicists,
much as it records, represents, or describes one. Jean Baudrillard condenses this to the educated on Nasmyth and
idea that territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it, ‘the map precedes Carpenter, would relinquish
the territory.’39 An exemplar of this idea is the map by naysmith and Carpenter (Figure the idea volcanism created the
moonscape. John Nasmyth and
0.1) comparing ‘things that age’ to the same shapes found on the moonscape. The map James Carpenter, The Moon:
hypothesizes ridges produced with aging (like those shown on the apple and the human Considered as a Planet, a World,
and a Satellite, 1885; J. Murray,
hand) are akin to the ridges and craters seen on the moon produced by the activity of a London.
heated core through volcanism (a popular belief at the time). Although incorrect, the power
of the representation of aging coupled with argumentation in naysmith and Carpenter’s
theory was popular with planetary scientists for over 70 years until we landed on the moon
and disproved their hypothesis. Making good maps is an artful science.
Moving from maps as objects of explanation to recognizing the key semiotic structures
of maps helps us understand how maps-as-representation operate as signs/signifiers.
Visual representations of data engage our cognitive perceptions, graphic skills, and rational
capacity to synthesize complex ideas. For designers, maps represent observations about
places, ideas or relationships. Being able to frame, represent, and order data through maps
empowers the process of thinking, including thinking visually. In the twenty-first century,
synthesis of complex data is a hallmark of critical thinking in all areas of knowledge.
organizing information means creating links between chains of data, links between
quantitative and qualitative data, and links between ideas through data. Visually organizing
data means managing these links at the intersection of visual perception, representation,
and the imagination. See for example B. W. Betts’ representations of human psychology
through geometrically abstracted figures resembling flowers (Figures 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4).
Betts, an architect, was inspired by an analogy Fichte used in The Science of Knowledge,
where modes of consciousness correspond to lines and circles.40 Betts attempted to show
successive stages of human evolution through symbolical mathematical forms.41 The

10
 Introduction

0.2, 0.3, 0.4

Shown are three plates from Geometrical Psychology, or, The Science of Representation an Abstract of the Theories and
Diagrams of B. W. Betts. Benjamin Betts intended to mathematically model using geometric forms as the evolution of
human consciousness. He was trained as an architect, but was unsatisfied with the lack of systemization in architecture
and turned to more metaphysical pursuits. Plate 10 represents the real form of a not perfectly ideal conscience. Plate 11
and Plate 12 manifest the polarization of positive and negative elements, say Struggle and Repentance become increasingly
evident to our conscious mind as they alternate between internal reflection and outward action. From the Introduction:
‘The symbolic forms which Mr. Betts has evolved through his system of Representation resemble, when developed in two
dimensions, conventionalized but very scientifically and beautifully conventionalized leaf-outlines. When in more than two
dimensions they approximate to the forms of flowers and crystals…The fact he has accidentally portrayed plant-forms when
he was studying human evolution is an assurance to Mr. Betts of the fitness of the symbols he has developed …’.

correspondence between mathematical geometries and nature confirmed for Betts that his
abstract mapping of the human psyche was a reasonable representation.
Mapmaking conceptualizes relationships between datasets in space as much as
actualizes real objects through spatial configurations. Cities are maps at full scale. Watson
and Crick weren’t able to understand the structure of the genes’ double helix until they
physically modeled it (Figure 0.5). odd, if one considers how very different their crude
model is compared to a physical DnA strand. But as robinson and Petchenik note:
assuming the knowledge–space–map relationship includes an isomorphism between map
and cognitive spatial territory tends to happen with ease in fields concerned with language
systems, signs, and meaning where maps are surrogates of space.42 however, to be robust
surrogates they need structure. What makes Watson and Crick’s model work as a map is
the underlying structure of the model. It is scaled, ordered, with syntax (elements like C, g,
A and T) and grammar (their linear organization), a geometric organization, and clear frame

11
Introduction

0.5
Working model made in metal used by James
Watson and Francis Crick to determine the three-
dimensional double-helical structure of the DNA
(deoxyribonucleic acid) molecule present in all
living organisms and responsible for transporting
in coded form the instructions necessary for
passing on hereditary characteristics. Watson
and Crick did not discover DNA per se, but
they were the first to formulate an accurate
description of the molecule’s structure in 1953.
The by-now familiar double-helix structure maps
the nucleotides making up the molecule which,
in turn, carry the forms of organic life. The only
way to understand structure was through a
three-dimensional map of the complementary
bases held together by a pair of hydrogen bonds.
James Watson and Francis Crick, Model of DNA,
Photo: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.

of reference: it describes the animal body of a human being. Alfred korzybski working
in the field of general semantics argues what maps retain of the territory is structure:
‘Two important characteristics of maps should be noticed. A map is not the territory it
represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its
usefulness’43
ernst haeckel’s maps (Figures 0.6 and 0.7; see also Figures 0.17 and 0.18) are part of a
larger atlas Art Forms of Nature (Kunstformen der Natur, 1904) describing detailed marine
and other animal and avian forms. haeckel, a german biologist and naturalist, discovered
and made visual catalogues of thousands of new species. his atlas of animals and sea
creatures is part of a bigger project mapping a genealogical tree relating all life forms.
representations of classes of physically similar types supports his thesis species developed
though similar forms (ontogeny). This link between evolutionary descent (phylogeny) and
form runs counter to Darwinism and supports the development of non-random form so
beautifully illustrated in the Kunstformen. The structure of the atlas imposed by haeckel
supports his evolutionary position. The science of the map was ultimately limited: haeckel’s
position has since been disproved.44

12
 Introduction

0.6 0.7
Ernst Haeckel, Kunstformen der Natur, Bibliographisches Ernst Haeckel, Kunstformen der Natur, Bibliographisches
Institut, Leipzig und Wien, 1904, plate 85, Ascidiacea, Institut, Leipzig und Wien, 1904, plate 99, Trochilidae,
10 × 14 in. 10 × 14 in.

Similarly, the side-scan sonar map shown (Figure 0.8) uses sound waves projected
through water bounced off the surface of the ocean bottom to simulate a view of objects
and terrain. Turning sound into a visual map using this technique works because the
translation between change in sound waves bounced back from sea-ocean bottom to the
surface translates to light and dark areas in a picture our visual apparatus—eye, brain—
can ‘see.’ The structure of the map is similar enough to the original territory even if the
method of observation involves a translation from sound to sight. Two student maps shown
(Figure 0.9) address the problem from a different point. Both maps are the same site, roughly
a six by three block area in an urban environment, and both illustrate the same condition:
the quality of sunlight in this place. however the results are strikingly different. The territory
of the first map is the perceptual experience of light at a particular time of day during a
specific season a little after noon on a sunny day in January. The second map overlays all
possible shade conditions over the course of a 365-day period. This is the maximum shade

13
0.8
Shown is a side-scan sonar map
used to determine the shape of
objects on the ocean floor. Side-
scan sonar (sound navigation
and ranging) continuously
records a return echo. This
enables the creation of the
‘picture’ of the seafloor. The
picture consists of light and dark
areas created when the sonar
scan hits soft and hard objects
respectively. Sonar side-scan
maps translate sound data into
visual data. Thunder Bay 2001,
NOAA-OER.

0.9
The two solar study maps
represent the same condition
on the same site in two very
different ways. Solar analyses
help architects visualize the
impact of natural light and
shadows on a site. The lighter
map (left) registers the ‘pooling’
of shadows around buildings
on an urban block a little after
noon on a sunny day. The
second study on the same urban
site (right) is a compilation of
all possible sun angles over a
one-year period. It represents
maximum amount of possible
shadow in a year. Both maps
use a similar planimetric layout,
graphic language, coloration
and index, yet the focus of the
mapmakers’ attention and the
time frame—one hour versus
a year of time—significantly
change the way the site sun
condition is represented.
Student work, Sun Map,
University of Tennessee, 1999,
11 × 17 in., ink and plastic on
vellum.
 Introduction

Diagram 0.1
Set of figures illustrating
the ambiguous nature of
the diagram. The series
could indicate a number of
possibilities including airflow in
a building, pedestrian passage
through an overpass, or fluid
dynamics for an air-conditioning
vent.

possible for this site given current building and street configuration. Both maps are ‘right’:
the first qualitative, the second quantitative.
The presence of structure distinguishes maps from diagrams. They are similar in
kind but not degree. Diagrams share some of the structure but don’t quantify or qualify
spatio-temporal relationships in the same way as maps. They are ‘simplified figures to
convey essential meaning,’ whereas maps tend toward robust meaning relative to the
subject.45 Symbols in diagrams have multiple possible significations until we specify
or point to their meaning through context using an index. Diagrams are indexical, i.e.
they point to something, but they aren’t indexed: they don’t order or organize within a
larger context nor do they have a spatio-temporal dimension like maps. Diagram 0.1
illustrates the point: at first glance it seems communicative. The sequence suggests a set
of operations performed on a simple box. Arrows indicate possible forces, movement,
or points at which deformations in the ‘box’ take place. But without a specific context
and an index or more structure, meaning is inferred but not secure. First, the box-shape
is scale-less. It could be a building, a piece of gum, a special type of material, even a
section of a larger entity as yet determined. Second, the arrows could mean a number of
possible ideas: people-movement, direction of deformation, direction of wind, water, how
a participant is supposed to move the game piece (if indeed this is a game) or any other
number of possible combinations. The point is the diagram in itself doesn’t contain enough
structure to communicate phenomenal information enabling it as a simulacrum. Designers
often confuse diagrams as maps. The danger is diagrams don’t offer much in the way of
phenomenal information and aren’t meaningful for hypothesis making for spatio-temporal
conditions. Diagrams are best used to communicate simplified figures, ‘caricatures in a
way, intended to convey essential meaning.’46 everyday usage may even include using
diagram as a synonym for graph, but for our purposes the degree of abstraction from
context, phenomenal experience, and spatio-temporal qualia determines the utility of the
diagram relative to the context robust map.
Finally, collage and montage are two examples of image constructions sharing
the idea of structure or a set of rules for assembly and legibility, but they aren’t maps.
Collage includes tangible artifacts as pieces or fragments of reality, often photographs or
drawings selected by the image-maker. In collage, artifacts retain their references to the

15
Introduction

0.10
As compelling and visually
exciting as the image is, it
cannot be called a map. It is a
collage of photographs taken by
a student of an urban street at
night. The author was looking
at the different patterns of
light, but rather than mapping
this phenomenon, the image
gives an overall impression,
not a calibrated, measured,
qualitative or quantitative
analysis. The difference between
the collage and a map is the
way the information in the map
is structured. Student work,
Washington University in St.
Louis, 2010, 24 × 24 in., photo
collage on museum board.

external reality of the assembled fragments. Montage cuts and reassembles fragments to
create new juxtapositions. The final image tends to appear more seamless than a collage.
The collage image shown in Figure 0.10 retains identifiable fragments. Both image types
share compositional structures: they are assembled from artifacts, retain some referent
to reality, can be spatial and have a boundary or frame. What they lack is an index. This is
significant because indexicality points to the expected meaning of the assembly. Indexes
are contextually dependent references assigning meaning by linking signs to actions, things
or ideas. C. S. Peirce’s definition is robust: ‘a sign that is linked to its object by an actual
connection or real relation by a reaction, so as to compel attention, in a definite place and
time.’47 This is somewhat expanded by French theorists such as Barthes and Baudrillard, but
the notion the index will ‘compel attention, in a definite place and time,’ is part of the context
function of the map separating the image, even seemingly robust images like collage and
montage, from the representational mechanics of maps.48

16
 Introduction

Complexity and Legibility

The paradox of the map rests on a fragile pretext: our ability to deceive ourselves about
its validity. Up until this point I worked to undermine the appearance of the map. The
question remains: how can we use this dialectical awareness of the map’s representation—
depending on us to think it and our thoughts about it? herein lies the power of the map.
The autonomy of the map is simultaneously illusory and necessary and, just as Adorno
suggests, art is the ‘social antithesis of society’ the map is the rational antithesis of reality.49
If true, how then do maps create new knowledge? I don’t want to suggest maps aren’t
utilarian, far from it. As one of our two primary means of communication—the other is
language (oral and written)—the visual representation of reality through maps has a long
and productive history. But maps, more than diagrams or sketches, look like and act like
scientific tools.50 Map collections or atlases are a specific case in point. The map in early
science offers a way to systematically describe or catalogue geographies, but equally, the
map was a substitution for the conditions of a place. The difference is instructive as one
assumes a history of the world represented in the map as representations of things as they
are, while the second explanation implies a shift: mapping the history of the world, as we
understand it becoming.51 In the first instance even a close resemblance between territory
and map proves not close enough: the gap between the map and territory exists regardless
of how accurate the map is. In mapping as philosophy, the question of being related to the
one of becoming predates the digital revolution.
Maps tend to do something: show movement from point a to b on a topology or in
geography. They construct order and establish relative relations. Map legibility is internally
determined. You need only decipher the key or legend and the internal syntax of the map
unfolds. In ‘Theories and Maps’, Stephan Toulmin, a philosopher writing about theories in
science, argues the efficiency of maps in providing more information than the set of point-
observations constituting their making:

This, of course, is the marvel of cartography: the fact that, from a limited number of
highly precise and well-chosen measurements and observations, one can produce a
map from which can be read off an unlimited number of geographical facts of almost
as great a precision.52

This capacity to ‘read off ‘ unlimited facts has interesting implications. It gives the subject
of the map the appearance of objective validity and suggests accurate maps could describe
everything. Taken to an extreme, the absurdity of this becomes apparent in Jorge luis
Borges’ thought experiment about the tragic usefulness of the perfect map:

of exactitude in Science
...In that empire, the craft of Cartography attained such Perfection that the Map of a
Single province covered the space of an entire City, and the Map of the empire itself
an entire Province. In the course of Time, these extensive maps were found somehow
wanting, and so the College of Cartographers evolved a Map of the empire that was of
the same Scale as the empire and that coincided with it point for point. less attentive

17
Introduction

to the Study of Cartography, succeeding generations came to judge a map of such

Magnitude cumbersome, and, not without Irreverence, they abandoned it to the rigors
of sun and rain. In the western Deserts, tattered Fragments of the Map are still to be
found, Sheltering an occasional Beast or beggar; in the whole nation, no other relic is
left of the Discipline of geography.53

Borges’ example illustrates another condition: the complexity of the map is not its
legibility—meaning whether it is accurate or clear—but rather its not exact legibility. The
map implies or infers spatial organizations projected onto the world. It isn’t exactitude per
se but the sufficiency of the model of the world generated by the map. It is clear from
Toulmin’s premise, maps do this with little effort. We can’t become enmeshed in the logics
of fidelity or mimesis to the lived world when regarding the map. We don’t have to go
far to illustrate the point. The map of tesseract by Charles hinton (Figure 0.11) presents
a mathematically determined 4-dimensional figure by definition impossible to see in our
3-dimensional world, however; the simulacra hinton creates helps us to imagine then act
on this imagined space.
This begs the question of the relationship between the map and the territory or idea being
mapped. Map-territory relations are key to how designers calibrate observations of place to
potential change. The relationship between map and territory describes the correspondence
between objects and representations of objects in space. Alfred korzybski’s famous dictum,
‘the map is not the territory,’ points to the essential problem—the representation of the
thing is not the thing itself.54 It is easy to confuse models of reality with reality itself, but
designers work in the ‘mental world of maps of maps’ where their drawings act as an infinite
set of maps describing ‘thoughts about thinking.’ Adding another layer of complexity:
the tools of digital thinking extend the possibility of signs and simulacra to their ‘infinite
regress.’ Where early maps or mapping appear to describe appearances mimetically, Jean
Baudrillard argues we can no longer delude ourselves: ‘Simulation is no longer that of a
territory, a referential being or substance. It is the generation of models of a real without
origin or reality: a hyper real. The territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive
it. It is…the map that precedes the territory…that engenders the territory.’55 The map is a
mirror of our gaze—it is what we allow ourselves to see—not what is seen. representations
bear similar burdens of inexactitude, but maps are complex because they claim a kind of
veracity or accuracy. The scientific traits of the map are obligatory: modeling reality through
measurement, reproducibility, dissemination, but as Borges addresses, these refract on us
where the fictions of the map reveal our persistent illusion of self:

The inventions of philosophy are no less fantastic than those of art: Josiah royce, in
the first volume of his work The World and the Individual (1899), has formulated the
following: ‘let us imagine that a portion of the soil of england has been leveled off
perfectly and that on it a cartographer traces a map of england. The job is perfect; there
is no detail of the soil of england, no matter how minute, that is not registered on the
map; everything has there its correspondence. This map, in such a case, should contain
a map of the map, which should contain a map of the map of the map, and so on to

18
 Introduction

0.11
These figures are from a series
of images by Charles Howard
Hinton, British mathematician
and science fiction writer, who
coined the term ‘tesseract’
appearing for the first time in
his book A New Era of Thought
(1888). The image shown
describes a procedure for
simulating the ‘tesseract’—a
four-dimensional analog of the
cube. Cubes have six square
faces where a tesseract has
eight cubical cells. Tesseracts
can be constructed but are not
possible to experience, as we
cannot access four-dimensional
space. Hinton pursued ways to
map space on a moral basis. An
intuitive perception of higher
space would, by rights, help us
rid ourselves of the directional
location in three-dimensional
space reinforcing our sense of
self. By ‘casting out the self,’
Hinton believed we would be
more sympathetic to others
and therefore create greater
harmony between experiencers
of our shared space. Charles
Howard Hinton, The Fourth
Dimension (1904), 1912, Ayer
Co., Kessinger Press reprint.

infinity.’ Why does it disturb us that the map be included in the map and the thousand
and one nights in the book of the Thousand and One Nights? Why does it disturb us
that Don Quixote be a reader of the Quixote and hamlet a spectator of Hamlet? The
reason may be this: these inversions suggest that if the characters of a fictional work
can be readers or spectators, we, its readers or spectators, can be fictions.56

Problems of Classification
A thought-experiment introduced early in my map class asks students to imagine for a
moment a map of the world. hold the image in mind. Identify prominent characteristics in

19
0.12
Étienne-Jules Marey’s lab,
the Station Physiologique,
established in 1882 studied
human locomotion and
measured the effort required
in movement. He wanted to
seek the favorable conditions
for energy use in human and
animal motions. His work
pioneered establishing the rules
governing physical exercise,
repetitive motion studies in
the workplace, and military
exercises for soldiers. His
studies are often purposely
misread in architecture: rather
than being used to understand
the amount of energy used in
the motions photographically
recorded by Marey, they are
read as volumetric studies
and appreciated for the fluid
shapes they create. As a
technique for describing motion
these maps are unparalleled.
Étienne-Jules Marey, Cheval
blanc monté, 1886, Locomotion
du cheval, expérience 4,
chronophotographie sur plaque
fixe, negative.

0.13
Similar to Figure 0.12 this map
of the movement of a single
muscle translates repeated
muscular contractions into a
graphical trace or index. The
data is interpolated by the
index and represented over
the span of multiple events
where each line is equivalent
to one pulse or movement. The
power of this representation is
it takes an isolated event (one
movement) and presents it
to the viewer as a continuous
event with variations over
time. This is an early example
of what Walter Benjamin
called the ‘optical unconscious’
where something otherwise
unavailable is revealed for
visual perception.59 Etienne-
Jules Marey, ‘Trace of repeated
muscular contractions,’ from
La Méthode graphique dans
les sciences expérimentales et
principalement en physiologie et
en medicine, Paris 1875, 194.
 Introduction

the map—answers generally include demarcations of boundaries, differences between land

and water, or the grid. next imagine the same map without boundaries or the grid or other
classifications. The thought experiment reveals to students a singular idea: organization
of the knowledge depends on assumptions made in the map about ordering and how
we catalogue the world of objects. This is what lorraine Daston argues as reciprocity in
the selection. Addressing the role of cataloguing objects in early natural philosophy she
identifies objects refusing any kind of neat cataloguing generating theoretical engagements
situated precisely within the confines of their respective disciplines. Thus through a ‘process
of reciprocity, our things individualized us as we picked them out of all the possibilities.’57
What defines catalogues and classifications? historians, philosophers, and others often
treat classification as an abstract intellectual achievement similar to theory, but separate
from social context and discipline practices. klein, lefèvre and others argue classification
is a historically situated activity entrenched in social and cultural institutions and informed
by perception and cognition, but also goals and interests, meaning, and collective ways of
working with and handling objects. It is a ‘practice linked with other practices’ allowing us
to bring to the foreground types of material objects, historical actors, and their epistemic
approach to these objects. Studies of classification contribute to a historical ontology of the
past taking into account the actors’ material culture and their ways of making and knowing.58
Catalogues and taxonomies share systemization. Systematic classification distinguishes
this from less robust ‘organizing’ more akin to a logical arrangement. Classification implies
objects are grouped in categories: they are identified, differentiated, and reduced. The
reduction is one of degree not kind. The example shown in Figure 0.14 demonstrates:
the classification of ‘political and criminal revolutionaries’ according to their physiognomy
reduces all possible human head shapes and sizes to a few and, in this case, rather
questionable criteria for determining if this head-shape indicates political criminality. The
particular set was identified as a ‘matroid,’ now typically used in mathematics, but used in
the map to imply a non-empty, finite set using a generalized concept satisfying a natural set
of properties. The criteria for this map clearly reflects late nineteenth-century society and its
naturalized hierarchies of order embedded in Victorian ethical and moral certitudes. A less
charged example produced by a student (Figure 0.15) looks at the topology of the human
faces in relation to the expression of emotion produced.
Map catalogues, taxonomies, sets, clusters, or groupings tend to use the classical
categorization approach grouping objects based on similar properties—properties identified
by the person imposing the order. These categories are discrete entities with members
sharing a set of properties. recent systems of categorization introduce conceptual clustering
and prototype theory. In the former not only are the characteristics (data) about an object
taken into consideration, but the language of the description used to define the category
is considered. There is some reciprocity therefore, between the objects in a set and the
boundaries of the set. The Carte du Tendre, or ‘Map of love’ demonstrates how this might
work (Figure 0.16). The Carte du Tendre equates emotional states of love with a geographical
territory containing a set of possible human responses: jealousy, indifference, desire and
so forth. The mapped spatio-cognitive terrain is indeterminate for order or a particular
catalogue of emotional states. each sub-type is understood in the context of other sub-

21
0.14, 0.15
These maps use the human face as subject to different ends. The first is part of the eighteenth-century tradition of
phrenology or the art of discerning the nature of a person’s character from their outer appearance with special focus
on the face and head. This technique was used as early as the Greeks but recorded comparisons were not produced
until the advent of photography. In 1852 James Redfield published comparative engravings between men and animals
ideologically charged to underscore contemporary racial hierarchies. In the late nineteenth century Sir Frances Galton
refined physiognomic characteristics of health, disease, beauty and criminality by mapping one face onto another using a
method of composite photography. The example shown is by C. Lombroso, from L’Homme Criminal. This is a comparison
of ‘révolutionnaires et criminels et politiques—matroïdes et fous moraux (criminal and political revolutionaries—matroid (a
finite set) and moral fools). Modern research discredited any scientific value to these studies. However the related area of
the study of the human expression of emotions, pioneered by Charles Darwin focusing on the physiological characteristics
of expression continues to be debated to this day. The second map made by an architecture student, follows on the
Darwinian tradition of capturing the shape of the face during different moments of emotive expression. The Topography
of Human Emotion map treats the face as a surface revealing the unique pattern in the topography of a given individual’s
face similar to a fingerprint. L’Homme criminal: Étude anthropologique et psychiatrique. Paris: Ancienne Librairie Germer
Baillière et Cie, Félix Alcan, Éditeur, 1887. Joaquin Pineda, Topography of Human Emotion, Florida International University,
2013, 24 × 36 in. printed.
 Introduction

0.16
La Carte du Tendre engraved by François Chauveau (1654) and included in the first part of Ciélie (1654–61) by Madeleine
de Scudéry. The map was popular in its time. This allegorical map of the stages of love places the start of the journey at
the near center top where one can go by way of the Reconaissance River through the various towns named for attributes
of beginning love: Constancy, Tenderness, Sensibility and Great Service. You could also travel the most direct route using
the Inclination River but beware Negligence on the side of the Lac d’Indifférence or Lake of Indifference. Passion is not
privileged in the time period—much too willful, but exists on the map closer to La Mer Dangereuse, or the Dangerous Sea.

types. Concept descriptions are generated for each class (jealousy or indifference) in relation
to their physical placement or hierarchy in the map. Concept clustering is generally applied
to machine learning, but thematic maps like the Carte du Tendre follow similar principles.
Introduced in the 1970s by eleanor rosch and george lakoff, prototype theory engages
directly with our assumptions of how types are encoded in the mind.60 Prototype theory states
we remember differences between objects based on prototypical exemplars, not from the
more traditional necessary and sufficient conditions used in classical categorization. Some
members of a category are more central than others and models aren’t necessarily definition
based. For example, lizard is defined by 1) egg lying, 2) cold-blooded and 3) external ears
and feet, but prototype categories are defined by characteristics of unequal status—cold-

23
Introduction

blooded may bring to mind Gila monsters more often than skink. Cognitive semantics
plays a significant role in prototype theory including using metaphor, a powerful linguistic
construction relating one idea in terms of another, similar to analogy. Metaphors (like ‘our
brains are computers’) determine how we generate and understand information. Mapping
as part of the mechanics of making a metaphor establishes systematic correspondence
between elements from one domain to another (love is a journey). Prototype theory
underscores human cognition as embodied experience of the world—lakoff and Johnson’s
primary theory is mind is inherently embodied, thought mostly unconscious and abstract
concepts largely metaphorical.61 They assert:

our brains take their input from the rest of our bodies. What our bodies are like and
how they function in the world thus structures the very concepts we can use to think.
We can’t think just anything—only what our embodied brains permit.62

Prototypes relate our empirical confrontations with the world into operational, not
definitive, categories (Figures 0.17 and 0.18). The similarity to maps is striking as the
translation from statistical data to visual representation involves similar interpolation and
interpretation Decisions made in mapping population demonstrates this in so far as they
determine categories of race, how and what to aggregate, where there is homogeneity, how
to interpret outliers, and how to correlate all of this to a visual perception (see Figure 1.33
for an analysis of the disambiguation of ‘race’ in the U.S. census).
Moving from an observation about the world to a re-presentation of the world in a
map requires mapmakers to categorize content. This seems obvious but, as the previous
discussion demonstrates, finding order is also to impose order on the undifferentiated
world around us. Designers do this as part of the design process: for every path taken
in a given design, countless others aren’t. Assuming informed choices indicates some
consideration given in ordering their relative importance. Mapping cognitive structures and
their concurrence with possible empirical conditions or conceptual ideation enriches the
process enabling designers to manage complex and robust solutions.

The Role of the Mapmaker

Cartographers and geographers generally agree the current frameworks for organizing
relationships in maps are limited. Terms like zoning, boundary condition and set theory
aren’t robust enough to usefully describe or catalogue a world characterized by complex
and culturally specific contexts, dynamic flows and nascent information networks. new
forms of mapping (cognitive mapping) and tools for representation (photogrammetry
and gIS) allow hitherto unimagined perspectives. This combination of factors qualifies
spatial relationships borrowed freely from alternative historiographies to propose new
ideologies in the social sciences, professional practices like architecture, urban design and
the humanities. The role of mapmaker as hypothesis-maker is evident as we move toward
a fourth paradigm in the humanities and sciences. According to Jim gray, the first three
paradigms are empirical science describing natural phenomena, theoretical science using
models and generalization, and computational science instigated by computers simulating

24
 Introduction

0.17, 0.18
A catalogue of the physical characteristics of a subgroups of Radiolaria by Ernst Haeckel from the Kunstformen der Natur.
This atlas or map collection of specimens from nature catalogues minuscule differences in genotypes of a subgenus typically
described through text, but beautifully displayed like exotic creatures for our visual pleasure by Haeckel. The map bridges
the specificity of the grammar of taxonomy and the visceral delight of Haeckel’s composed and exquisitely rendered ideal
specimens. Ernst Haeckel, Kunstformen der Natur, Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig und Wien, 1904, plate 31, Cyrtoidea
and plate 53, Prosobranchia (obsolete classification).

complex phenomena. The idea of a ‘fourth paradigm’ introduced by gray around eScience
emphasizes data exploration.63 gray argues everything about science, and I would add the
humanities and social sciences, is changing with the impact of information technology:
‘experimental, theoretical, and computational science are all being affected by the data
deluge, and a fourth, “data-intensive” science paradigm is emerging.’64 humanities
research is equally affected as new areas of interrogating objects, archives, and theoretical
assumptions respond to new modes of knowledge made possible by visualization and data
collection technologies. hypothesis-making is less about deductive or inductive reasoning
in the new model, but pattern identification of data, data simulations. Techniques for this
data-intensive research are so different they supersede computational science and present
a new paradigm. Increasingly, cartography and mapmaking is responding. Designers need

25
Introduction

to address the impact of the increasing amounts of data available from a multiplicity of
sources and how this will impact and inform how design decisions are made.
Data-intensive research including cartography and mapmaking consists of three basic
activities: capture, curation, and analysis.65 Including quantitative and qualitative data
collected through instruments to individual observation, objects in hand to remote sensing,
data at all scales and shapes gathered using the most structured practices to ad hoc
collections. Instrumentation for capturing data is sensitive, capable of adjusting to multiple
environments and immediately accessible as digital data. Think about documenting a
physical condition using a basic tool like the camera. The phone camera takes, processes,
manipulates and shares images in a matter of minutes, accomplishing what previously
took days in a physical laboratory with skilled technicians. Although the time to get data is
shorter, the complexity and amount of data makes curation more difficult. In design fields
this means translating sense data, visual observation, data collected through sensors and
others devices into legible output impacting the design process. Maps and mapping are
one way of doing this. The graphic index (Figures 0.9 and 0.10) has a short but immensely
significant history in the sciences with equally productive misreadings in the arts and
humanities. For example, the fascination with speed and movement in the sciences at the
end of the nineteenth century shares a well-documented influence on the arts. Étienne-
Jules Marey’s studies of animal and human movement meant to examine the amount of
caloric energy required to perform certain tasks are echoed in artists like Marcel Duchamp,
Umberto Boccioni, and giacomo Balla.66
Finally, analyzing is not only about processing, but entails determining which data to
use and what modeling, including data visualization, to perform. looking at all available
data in the environment isn’t currently feasible and given predicted growth rates will be
impossible without modeling and data visualization technologies to synthesize and organize
it. A simple example from building design highlights the problem. Current computer-aided
design software can manage aspects of the systems necessary in the documentation of the
building process. This replaces a paper-based database, but includes significantly more
information from engineers, contractors and manufacturers. This replaces pre-computer-
age paper-based databases and affords the inclusion of significantly more information
from engineers, contractors and manufacturers now embedded in a digital database. Data
is used to make simulations that, in turn, generate more data. Most disciplines, including
architecture, industrial design, and graphic design are seeing changes as a result of new
design software and hardware in two discipline subareas: computational performance and
fabrication concerned with collecting, analyzing, simulating and assembling objects and
environments, and systems design focused on managing human and social ecologies.
‘Computational thinking,’ an idea borrowed from computer science, quickly radicalized
design disciplines and created productive debate around what and how to represent data
in the design process. Making complex maps using large datasets is one option enabling
designers to bridge the gap between human and machine observation. Maps are efficient,
evocative, and indeterminate. They model data well enough for us to infer relations, forecast
possibilities, while maintaining data consistency. Additionally, maps are reproducible and
transmittable to other designers.

26
 Introduction

Designer as Mapmaker
Architects and designers are, historically, mapmakers. This next section looks at maps as
social inscriptions producing identity; specifically the way designers use maps to provoke
new identities of place. For designers, mapping elucidates the gap between representation
and territory or context. neil gaiman describes a similar situation in relation to storytelling:

The way you describe the tale is by telling the story. It is a balancing act and a dream.
The more accurate the map, the more it resembles the territory. The most accurate map
… would be the territory and thus would be perfectly accurate and perfectly useless.
The tale is the map that is the territory (emphasis mine).67

To paraphrase: the drawing is the map is the territory. Designers and architects are
storytellers about the set of possible relations between humans and their environments
including their social, political, cultural, and scientific selves imagined in the corresponding
spatial arrangement. The configuration of spatial orders reflects and projects the social
imaginary of a culture. Designers work in abstract and geometrical spaces in their
representations to order the world just as cartographers order the terrestrial globe or
other territories in the map.
As geometrical constructs, all drawing technologies used in architectural representation
are based on projections. Projections as drawing technology allow for the translation from
a three-dimensional space to a two-dimensional surface. The orthographic set (plans,
sections, elevations) used in design are parallel projections where lines of projection are
perpendicular or orthogonal to the drawing surface. Some of the earliest orthographic
projections from the second century bc are used in cartography.68 Projections require
mathematics to rationalize two-dimensional views—they aren’t techniques, rather
technologies giving us precise and measured control over our representations of objects
or spaces. Axonometric projections include isometrics or parallel-line projections where
the angles between the projections of the axes are equal (120°). Axonometric projections
are parallel-line projections used to create a three-dimensional pictorial representation
of an object. There are three types of axonometric projections each defined by the angle
used in the drawing between the projection of the three coordinate axes: isometric,
dimetric and trimetric projections. To understand the ‘projection of the axes,’ imagine
the intersection of the x, y, and z coordinate axes for a cube. True angles or those in the
actual three-dimensional object remain at 90° but in the axonometric drawing space they
are represented using other angles. In an isometric drawing the angles at the projection
of the axes are 120° which exaggerates the planes of the cube and makes it easer to ‘see’
more of each face of the cube at the same time. In perspective projection parallel lines
converge at vanishing points. This projection closely resembles views of the world we see
in binocular vision because unlike parallel line projections, perspectival projection lines
parallel with the viewer’s line of sight converge at the horizon. Train tracks look this way to
us where parallel lines appear to converge in the distance. These drawing technologies are
simulations of reality, even perspective: in binocular vision lines are curved, not straight.
Designers rarely operate on the thing itself—we use abstract representations of objects to

27
Introduction

manipulate design, construction and production. Through drawing technologies designers

create simulations of reality or maps of the territory of the object. In the case of buildings
this is easy to understand: each time a designer re-draws a place or object they re-present
an abstraction of a territory to themselves upon which they act.

Socialist London(s)
The following discussion looks at two very different uses for the map in the design of spatial
relationships operating at the scale of a city. The spatial identities of these maps are different
even as the geographical locale is the same: post-war london. These map projections are
planimetric with similar indices—the functional organization of the city. Patrick Abercrombie’s
London: Social and Functional Analysis Map (1944) made in post-war london is a large-
scale plan for the re-distribution of communities after World War II (Figure 0.19). Pre- and
interwar planning tended to emphasize the functional over the communal. The modernist
city plans of le Corbusier projected a technocratic world where circulation and movement
(mobilité), guaranteeing function, triumphed over ambiguity, and clarity over indeterminacy
(see Figure 3.19). The power of Abercrombie’s map is the inclusion of ‘social’ context—the
indeterminate communities loosely floating around the city center providing little descriptive
information, but suggesting a city consisting of small villages. note there is little other context
in the map: no roadways, very little indication of topography and only minimal geographical
clues this is london. Abercrombie’s plan is credited with influencing the growth of the outer
ring of suburban development and the depopulation of london after the war. The devastated
postwar landscape was reimagined as a regional landscape with a blending of housing and
industry, new transport and open spaces (Figure 0.20). Abercrombie is considered to be one
of the last english visionary architect-planners. one other comment: without the map title
I argue it would be difficult to identify what city is being represented. The beauty of maps
is their paucity—they can communicate complex ideation through carefully selected and
measured but minimal indicators.
In contrast the Plan of London (1939–41) by the M.A.r.S. group (Modern Architectural
research group) (Figure 0.21) was a mid-century British collaboration of architects and
architectural critics. Arthur korn, a german-Jewish architect and urban planner and émigré
to england, is the plan’s primary author. The map shows a largely unchanged city center
with the addition of a series of linear agglomerations composed of social units based
round a rail network. The linear bands contain neighborhoods of communal housing. The
spatial organization of the city in the map mirrors the mapmakers’ socialist ideology and
hopes for spatial and social equity through mobility. The modernist notion of movement is
interpreted as a spatial network of communications and exchange or transactions drawn in
greater detail in the accompanying folio. Although the M.A.r.S. group plan wasn’t adopted
it was a successful polemic against the rational and orthogonal city plans promoted before
the war in Modernism. The map’s programmatic organization was clearly influenced by
the modernist agenda of dwelling, work, recreation and transport as the primary urban
functions in the city, however; the london plan incorporated these in a new schematic
relationship. The linear organization of the housing areas intersecting the transportation
spine combined earlier linear city ideas with a ‘theory of contacts’: human contacts and

28
0.19
Patrick Abercrombie
was an English
town planner
who trained as
an architect. ‘The
London Map’
influenced the New
Town movement
in postwar Europe
aimed at redressing
overcrowding
in the larger
industrialized cities.
There was an acute
need to provide
housing after the
devastation of the
war and create
strong identities
for these new
communities to
heal and prevent
similar atrocities.
Like the Ebenezer
Howard’s Garden
City movement of
the late 1800s the
planners of these
new towns wanted
to provide citizens
with affordable
housing, greenspace
through parks, and
strong community
identity, much
as Abercrombie
imagines within
the confines of the
city in the London
Plan. Patrick
Abercrombie,
London Plan: Social
and Functional
Analysis, 1943.

0.20
Patrick
Abercrombie,
County of London
Plan, 1943. This
plan is part of the
same proposal. It is
a more normative
representation
cataloguing
existing post-war
conditions.
Introduction

0.21
Arthur Korn and Felix J.
Samuely, Master Plan for
London, 1942 based on research
carried out by the Town Planning
Committee of the M.A.R.S.
Group: draft plan giving a
rough impression of what the
map of London would look like
with ribbons of open country
penetrating the city, from A.
Korn and F. J. Samuely ‘A Master
Plan for London’, Architectural
Review 91: 150, 1942.

transactions of all types, intellectual, social and commercial.69 For korn the isolation created
by the amorphous sprawl of london would continue ‘unless there is some organization
of social life and its expression in architecture and town planning; for the visual effect on
the mind is considerable.’70 The map negotiates the orthogonal planning of modernist
cities with similar underlying urban functions reconfigured around the idea of exchange—
not dissimilar from the Abercrombie plan but foregrounding transportation technology
facilitating how contact would occur presented in a seemingly precise rendition in the map.
As english critic Dennis Sharp wrote:

That it was unworkable need not detain us here, for what the architects and planners
had worked up into a programmatic solution for the future of london was not a
concrete scheme but a concept that would by its very nature produce interpretations.71

In the last analysis it was the map’s capacity to produce interpretations for a new kind of
urban organization portending its lasting influence. The map did not solve the problem—it
was a hypothesis to test how a city could be planned to facilitate human interaction while
maintaining a social order. It was a plan to humanize the city without disrupting the agency
of the state to preside over civil and civic relationships.

30
 Introduction

Revolutionary France
Finally we turn to an earlier set of maps by the French architecture Claude-nicolas ledoux
in eighteenth-century France: the plan for the ideal city of Chaux (Figure 0.22) close to
the royal saltworks in the Franche-Comté. The layout is along a semicircle with buildings
arrayed on the outer arc of the circle and across the mid-point. ledoux’s plan of the
saltworks resembles his plan for the ideal city of Chaux (Figure 0.23) executed some twenty
years later in post-revolutionary France. Although the ideal city was intended by ledoux
as an urban fiction he locates it in the same geographical area as the earlier saltworks. For
ledoux architecture was the ‘rival of nature, out of which another nature could be formed.’72
The city of Chaux is not a utopian proposal per se, but a possible future. It is this context in
which the plan map for the saltworks must be considered.
Arc-et-Senans as built was ledoux’s second proposal for the site. The first organized all
of the buildings around the edges of a square connected by covered walkways. The central
square courtyard was the location for storing the firewood used to heat the vats for salt
extraction foregrounding the importance of this resource in the production of salt.73 This
was an ambitious symbology for the spatial imaginary of the modern factory, but louis
XV did not approve of the placement of the chapel in the corner of the scheme. The first
plan was less hierarchal and ledoux later stated he neglected the symbolic aspects of the
plan in favor of the factory. The plan shows a series of individuated buildings dissimilar
from the more typical Baroque organizations of a single massing for multiple programs.
The plan for the saltworks included separate structures for guardhouses, a chapel, bakery,
prison, workshops for the coopers and the director’s house. The whole ensemble (Figure
0.23) is hierarchical with the director’s house at the center, the saltworks to either side

0.22
Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, Map of
the environs of the Saltworks
at Chaux, plate 14 from
L’Architecture considérée sous
le rapport de l’art des mœurs
et de la legislation, Paris,
1804 (reprinted 1980, G. Olms,
Hildesheim).

31
Introduction

0.23
The Royal Saltworks (Saline
Royal) Claude-Nicolas
Ledoux, general plan of the
Royal Saltworks at Arc-
et-Senans, ca. 1778–1804,
François-Noël Sellier,
engraver.

along the straight sections, quarters for the guards along the arc with bathrooms and
vegetable gardens along the backside. Architecture historian emil kaufmann argued the
formal physical expression of the plan mirrors the kantian idea of the ‘autonomy’ of the
individual as the basis for moral principle. kaufmann links ledoux directly to rousseau’s
‘pacte social,’ his enthusiasm for natural settings, rousseau’s social thought and ledoux’s
ideal of a ‘natural’ society, hygiene, physical exercise, education and communal living—all
embedded in the program and arrangement of the new saltworks.74 referring to Anthony
Vidler’s conclusions about kaufmann’s analysis offers a way for us to understand the
intellectual project as a potential spatial identity with a social prescription. Vidler argues the
aim of kaufmann’s observations was modest and confined to demonstrating the relations
between thought about social form, and thought about architectural form:

Thus, similarly, when he speaks of ledoux in the same breath as kant and rousseau, he
was perhaps not so much claiming that there is an inner essence in ledoux’s architecture
that is kantian, nor certainly that ledoux had read kant or wished to be a kantian architect,
but more simply that there seemed to be a homology between, in their different realms,
ledoux’s use of separate, independent, geometric forms, and say, kant’s desire for
principles of independent critical judgment, and rousseau’s return to the principle of
‘natural man.’ I say ‘more simply,’ but in fact, such relations introduce a complexity in
the interpretative structure that is belied by the crude juxtaposition, and that goes well
beyond the equally crude ‘social/economic/formal’ postulations of Marxist art historians
of the period. here, kaufmann is less a follower of the psychological formalism of the
Vienna School than an adherent of the principles of his mentor, Max Dvořák’s, concept
of ‘the history of art as the history of ideas.’75

32
 Introduction

0.24
Aerial view of the saltworks
at Arc-et-Senans today.

Following on Vidler from Dvořák we would re-state this as ‘the history of cartography as the
history of ideas’ where the cartographic imaginary links civic order and the social imaginary
through the agency of individuals disciplining themselves within the dominant power
structures of monarchy. The director’s house in the second plan is akin to the all-watching
eye and position of the king in relation to subject. In Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault
explores how in modernity the principles of order and control tend to ‘disindividualize’
powers making it inherent in institutions rather than individuals. For Foucault:

‘Discipline’ may be identified neither with an institution nor with an apparatus; it is

a type of power, a modality for its exercise, comprising a whole set of instruments,
techniques, procedures, levels of application, targets; it is a ‘physics’ or an ‘anatomy’
of power, a technology.76

For French bourgeois society, the king and his representative agents are symbols of
power, but in the case of ledoux’s saltworks, this symbolic power becomes a spatial
practice expressed and molded by the behaviors of its inhabitants. This is the argument
Tom Conley makes. he shows issues of cartographic metaphor run through the heart of
Western thought—not only maps shape identities and space, but cartographic imagination
influences the structure and content of language and thought.77 Although similar to
Foucault’s ‘panoptic machine’ borrowed from seventeenth-century prison reformer Jeremy
Bentham, where individuals internalize the technology of the agent, ledoux’s abstraction of
the relationship of the individual to power is of another order. To understand how, we need
compare the two as metaphor and representation of space.
Bentham provided Foucault with an architectural model for disindividualized power:
a circular shaped prison with cells open to a central guard tower discussed at length in
Chapter 3 (Figure 3.34). In Bentham’s model prisoners don’t see each other and are situated
in such way they can’t see if the tower is occupied; their perception is one of being always

33
Introduction

surveyed. even though geometrically similar, ledoux’s spatial configuration exercises

power through a different agent. In plan the director’s house represents power—not as
an observation tower but a temple.78 ledoux illustrates similar symmetrical relationships
of power in an engraving for the theater auditorium in Besançon where individuals in the
audience view the stage and the room in the same instance (Figure 0.25). The saltworks
organizes the gaze of the king through a director who supervises and commands, but in
a symmetric structure: everybody sees the center of the circle and his own place in the
whole of the social hierarchy. each ‘body’ understands their role in the larger entity where
emphasis is an ideal of government as a matter of personal conduct.
Borrowing from Foucault, ‘government’ didn’t refer only to political structures or to the
management of states; rather it designated the way the conduct of individuals or groups
might be directed: the government of children, of souls, of communities, of families, of the
sick. As Dino Felluga argues, it covers not only legitimately constituted forms of political
or economic subjection but modes of action more or less considered and calculated to
act upon the possibilities of the actions of other people.79 In this sense, governance is a

0.25
In L’Architecture considerée sous le rapport de l’art des moeurs et de la législation,
1804, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux says: ‘In order to be a good architect … one must be
able to read in the vast circle of human affection. To establish the effects so posterity
need not be censured/condemned, the look of the architect is more important than you
think. What good is knowledge if it doesn’t make the man better? Usually it generates
skeptics, who sow doubt and uncertainty. Why do we insist on learning the irrelevant,
that what one is often obliged to forget?. Oh, God of good taste, thus you allow that
your sanctuary is profaned.’. Eye Reflecting the Theater of Besançon, (ca. 1784) Claude-
Nicolas Ledoux, engraving after Ledoux, 47cm × 28.7 cm; Scanned from exhibition
catalogue Revolutionsarcktektur: Boullée, Ledoux, Lequeu, G. Metken and K. Gallwitz
(eds), Staatliche Kunsthalle, Baden-Baden, 1970.

34
 Introduction

structure organizing the possible field of actions of others. The relationship to power isn’t
sought in the side of subjugation or pressure nor voluntary linking (at best instruments of
power), but rather in the area of the singular mode of action neither warlike nor juridical
which is government80 so ‘power exists only when it is put into action.’81 Foucault therefore
makes clear by contrast,

a power relationship can only be articulated on the basis of two elements which are
each indispensable if it is really to be a power relationship: ‘the other’ (the one over
whom power is exercised) be thoroughly recognized and maintained to the very end as
a person who acts; and faced with a relationship of power, a whole field of responses,
reactions, results, and possible inventions may open up.82

Power always entails a set of actions performed upon another person’s actions and
reactions.83 The spatial analogue for ledoux isn’t just a centralized space, but one where
the center is empty—it can only be a reflection or mirror of the gaze of the monarch. not
as totalitarian oppressor, but as spectator to the wholly ordered social hierarchy giving
rational clarity to the social compact. The cartographic imaginary acts at the scale of the
royal saltworks but territorializes rousseau’s communitarian principles in the cognitive
imagination of the French bourgeoisie. The city of Chaux develops and extends the idea of
a community life to a model for a new industrial urbanism.
looking at the cemetery ledoux proposed for the city of Chaux complex supports this
thesis (Figure 0.26). The cemetery building is a centrally organized plan similar to the saltworks
itself. here, though, the center is void; in point of fact it is impossible to physically occupy. The
relation to death is purely poetic and cosmic—just as ledoux marks the border between raw
nature and the emerging industrial civilization through the articulation of the circle in its larger
territory of Chaux, the cemetery is buried underground barely visible, acting as a physical and
metaphorical transit between the present and an unknowable future.
ledoux draws the ideal plan for the city of Chaux during his imprisonment during the
revolution. luc grison argues contrary to most scholarship that ledoux’s ideal city is not
the result of an ‘opportunist appropriation by the former king’s architect of his own work in a
revolutionary light,’ it is likely ledoux had in mind from the very beginning the project of an
ideal city realizing rousseau’s dream of a society in harmony with nature.84 It is an allegorical
symbol he used frequently throughout his treaty on architecture. For ledoux the organization
of the city could be better than nature, it would bring man’s nature into a rationalized and
mapped spatial geometry symbolically and literally structuring our social practices through a
spatial imaginary.

35
0.26
Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, Cemetery at Chaux, section and plan, 1804, N. Ransonnette,
engraver.
 Introduction

Notes
1 M. S. Monmonier, How to Lie with Maps, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Il, 1991: 1.
2 Stanley Brouwn, This Way Brouwn, 25-2-61.26-2-61. Verlag gebr. könig, Cologne and new
York, 1961.
3 These are generally understood as the hallmarks of nineteenth- and twentieth-century
cartography.
4 J. B. harley and P. laxton, The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography.
Johns hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 2001; M. Dodge, r. kitchin and C. r. Perkins,
Rethinking Maps, new Frontiers in Cartographic Theory 28, routledge, london, 2009; D.
Cosgrove (ed.), Mappings, reaktion Books, london, 1999; D. Turnbull and h. Watson, Maps
are Territories: Science is an Atlas: A Portfolio of Exhibits, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, Il, 1993; J. Pickles, A History of Spaces: Cartographic Reason, Mapping, and the
Geo-coded World, routledge, london, 2004.
5 D. Woodward and g. M. lewis, Cartography in the Traditional African, American, Arctic,
Australian, and Pacific Societies, volume 2, book 3, of J. B. harley, D. Woodward and M. S.
Monmonier, The History of Cartography, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Il, 1998.
6 Pickles, A History of Spaces, 15.
7 OED Online, oxford University Press, ‘visualize, v. 1. trans. To form a mental vision, image,
or picture of (something not visible or present to the sight, or of an abstraction); to make
visible to the mind or imagination. 2. absol. or intr. To form a mental picture of something
not visible or present, or of an abstract thing, etc.; to construct a visual image or images in
the mind. 2. The action or process of rendering visible.’.
8 o. halpern, Beautiful Data: A History of Vision and Reason since 1945, experimental Futures
series, Duke University Press, Durham, nC, 2015. ‘Introduction’: 21.
9 D. Dorling and D. Fairbairn, Mapping: Ways of Representing the World, longman, harlow,
1997: 3.
10 A. h. robinson and B. B. Petchenik, The Nature of Maps, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, Il, 1976: 2–3.
11 robinson and Petchenik, The Nature of Maps: 4.
12 J. B. harley and D. Woodward, Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Medieval Europe
and the Mediterranean, vol 1, The History of Cartography, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, Il, 1987: xvi.
13 Pickles, A History of Spaces: 15.
14 Pickles, A History of Spaces: 18.
15 robinson and Petchenik, The Nature of Maps.
16 robinson and Petchenick, The Nature of Maps: 11–14.
17 Michel Foucault predicted the move from historical analysis to increasing need to understand
how we are as embodied beings in the world in the social sciences and humanities: ‘We are
in the epoch of simultaneity: we are in the epoch of juxtaposition, the epoch of the near and
far, of the side-by-side, of the dispersed. We are at a moment, I believe, when our experience
of the world is less that of a long life developing through time than that of a network that

37
Introduction

connects points and intersects with its own sky.’ M. Foucault, ‘of other spaces,’ Diacritics
16(1): 22–27, 1986. he was but one among many including henri lefebvre, The Production
of Space (Blackwell, oxford, 1991); gaston Bachelard, La formation de l’esprit scientifique:
contribution ‘a une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective,’ (5th edition, J. Vrin ed.,
Paris, 1967); Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA, 1984); David harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the
Origins of Cultural Change (Blackwell, oxford, 1989); Saskia Sassen, The Global City: New
York, London, Tokyo, (Princeton University Press, Princeton, nJ, 1991); and edward Soja,
Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places (Blackwell,
Cambridge, MA, 1996).
18 D. gregory, Geographical Imaginations, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, 1994: 15; Pickles, A
History of Spaces: 6.
19 Pickles, A History of Spaces: 20 (emphasis in original).
20 Pickles, A History of Spaces: 23.
21 F. Farinelli, ‘Did Anaximander ever say (or write) any words? The nature of cartographical
reason,’ Ethics, Place, and Environment 1(2): 135–44, 1998: 135; and Pickles, A History of
Spaces: 22–23.
22 J. Corner, ‘The agency of mapping: speculation, critique and invention,’ in Cosgrove (ed.)
Mappings: 225.
23 r. J. Chorley and P. haggett, Models in Geography, vol. 2, Methuen, london, 1967: 48–49.
24 k. Burke, ‘What are the signs of what? A theory of entitlement,’ Anthropological Linguistics
4 (June), 1–23, 1962.
25 M. Dodge and r. kitchin, Atlas of Cyberspaces, accessed September 2016. http://www.
kitchin.org/atlas/index.html. rob kitchin and Martin Dodge pushed the theory of maps
to the limits of the ontology where maps aren’t treated as unified representations but
constellations of ongoing processes.
26 M. Dodge, r. kitchin, and C. r. Perkin, Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in Cartographic
Theory, routledge, london, 2009: 18–20.
27 OED Online, oxford University Press, ‘image, n. … 4. A thing or (now esp.) person in which
the aspect, form, or character of another is reproduced; an exact likeness; a counterpart,
copy. 5. Psychology: A mental representation of something (esp. a visible object) created
not by direct perception but by memory or imagination; a mental picture or impression; an
idea, conception. Also: (with modifying adjective) a mental representation due to any of the
senses (not only sight) or to organic sensations.’.
28 OED Online. oxford University Press, ‘representation, n.1. … b. Philos. An image, concept,
or thought in the mind, esp. as representing an object or state of affairs in the world; spec. a
mental image or idea regarded as an object of direct knowledge and as the means by which
knowledge of objects in the world may indirectly be acquired (now chiefly hist.). Also: the
formation or possession of images, concepts, or thoughts in the mind, esp. as representing,
or as a means of acquiring knowledge of, objects or states of affairs in the world.’.
29 OED Online, oxford University Press, ‘image’.

38
 Introduction

30 r. n. giere, Understanding Scientific Reasoning, Thomson/Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, 5th

edn, 2006: 743.
31 T. Sauer and r. Scholl (eds), The Philosophy of Historical Case Studies, Boston Studies in
the Philosophy and history of Science 319. Springer International Publishing, new York,
2016: 126.
32 r. n. giere, Understanding Scientific Reasoning, Thomson/Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, 5th
edition, 2006: 743.
33 B. Molyneaux, The Cultural Life of Images: Visual Representation in Archaeology, routledge,
london, 1997: 84–86.
34 lucia nuti, ‘Mapping places: Chorography and visions in the renaissance’ in Cosgrove
(ed.), Mappings: 90.
35 S. P. hanna and V. J. Del Casino, Mapping Tourism, University of Minnesota Press,
Minneapolis, Mn, 2003.
36 Deleuze and guatarri write explicitly about maps: ‘The map is open and connectable in all
of its dimensions; it is detachable, reversible, susceptible to constant modification. It can be
torn, reversed, adapted to any kind of mounting, reworked by an individual, group, or social
formation. It can be drawn on a wall, conceived of as a work of art, constructed as a political
action or as a mediation.’ g. Deleuze and F. guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and
Schizophrenia, Athlone Press, london, 1987: 12.
37 V. J. Del Casino and S. P. hanna, ‘representations and identities in tourism map spaces,’
Progress in Human Geography 24(1): 23–46, 2000.
38 Cosgrove, Mappings: 15.
39 J. Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI,
1994.
40 J. g. Fichte, P. heath, and J. lachs, Science of Knowledge (Wissenschaftslehre) with the
first and second introductions, Century Philosophy Sourcebooks, Appleton-Century-Crofts,
new York, 1970.
41 Fichte et al., Science of Knowledge: 9.
42 robinson and Petchenik, The Nature of Maps: 22.
43 A. korzybski, Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General
Semantics, International non-Aristotelian library, The International non-Aristotelian library
Publishing Company, lancaster, PA., 2nd edn, 1941: 58.
44 e. haeckel, Kunstformen der Natur, Bibliographisches Institut, leipzig and Vienna, 1094.
extending haeckel’s thesis leads to some rather strange and disturbing conclusions. of the
ten races he divided human beings into, haeckel claimed the Caucasian group associated
with Proto-Uralic and Indo-germanic groups is superior to all others. haeckel’s racism
was, according to Stephen Jay gould, harvard paleontologist, a contributor to the rise of
nazism (S. J. gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Belknap Press of harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1977: 77–78).
45 B. S. hall, ‘The didactic and the elegant: Some thoughts on scientific and technological
illustrations in the Middle Ages and renaissance,’ in B. Braigie (ed.), Picturing Knowledge:

39
Introduction

Historical and Philosophical Problems Concerning the Use of Art in Science, University of
Toronto Press, Toronto, 1996: 9.
46 hall, ‘The didactic and the elegant’: 11.
47 Commens Dictionary of Peirce’s Terms under ‘Index,’ http://www.commens.org/dictionary/
term/index.
48 Commens Dictionary of Peirce’s Terms under ‘Index’.
49 T. W. Adorno, g. Adorno and r. Tiedemann, Aesthetic Theory, routledge and kegan Paul,
london, 1984.
50 ‘If galileo’s scientific attitude is held to have influenced his aesthetic judgment, his aesthetic
attitude may just as well be held to have influenced his scientific convictions; to be more
precise: both as a scientist and as a critic of the arts he may be said to have obeyed the
same controlling tendencies.’ e. Panofsky, Galileo as a Critic of the Arts, Martinus nijhoff,
The hague, 1954: 20.
51 W. e. newman, ‘Space, place and the ideology of the map,’ Master’s thesis, harvard
University, May 1998: 147.
52 S. Toulmin, The Philosophy of Science: An Introduction, hutchinson’s University library,
hutchinson, london, 1953, 111.
53 J. l. Borges, ‘Travels of Praiseworthy Men (1658) by J. A. Suarez Miranda,’ in Jorge luis
Borges and Adolfo Bioy Casares (eds), A Universal History of Infamy, Dutton, new York,
1972.
54 Alfred korzybski introduces the expression in ‘A non-Aristotelian system and its necessity
for rigor in mathematics and physics,’ presented to the American Mathematical Society at
the American Association for the Advancement of Science, new orleans, lA, December
28,1931. reprinted in korzybski, Science and Sanity, 747–761.
55 Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation: 1.
56 J. l. Borges, Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, augmented edn, new
Directions, new York, 1964: 195–196.
57 l. Daston, Things that Talk: Object Lessons from Art and Science, zone Books, new York,
2004.
58 U. klein and W. lefèvre, Materials in Eighteenth-century Science: A Historical Ontology,
Transformations, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007: 9.
59 W. Benjamin, ‘The work of art in the age of mechanical reproducibility,’ in The Work of Art
in the Age of its Technological Reproducibility and other Writings on Media, M. Jennings,
B. Doherty and T. levin (eds), Cambridge, MA, 2008: 37.
60 rosch is a cognitive psychologist whose research focuses on categorization. See e. h.
rosch, ‘natural categories,’ Cognitive Psychology 4(3): 328–50, 1973, and e. h. rosch and
C. B. Mervis, ‘Categorization of natural objects,’ Annual Review of Psychology 32: 89–11,
1981.
61 g. lakoff and M. Johnson, Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge
to Western Thought, Basic Books, new York, 1999.
62 lakoff and Johnson, Philosophy in the Flesh: 2.

40
 Introduction

63 T. hey, S. Tansley and k. Tolle, ‘Jim gray on eScience: a transformed scientific method,’
in A. J. g. hey (ed.), The Fourth Paradigm: Data-intensive Scientific Discovery, Microsoft
research, redmond, WA, 2009: xvii–xxxi.
64 hey et al., ‘Jim gray on eScience’: xiii.
65 hey et al., ‘Jim gray on eScience’: xiii.
66 These artists are part of the Futurism, Dada and Cubist movements in the early twentieth
century. Boccioni’s sculpture masterpiece, ‘Unique Forms of Continuity in Space’ (1913)
depicts a ‘synthetic continuity’ of motion similar to Duchamp’s work, but in a three-
dimensional space. Boccioni critiqued Duchamp and František kupka claiming that their
work was about ‘analytical discontinuity.’
67 n. gaiman, Fragile Things: Short Fictions and Wonders, William Morrow, new York, 2006.
68 hipparchus used this kind of projection to make drawings of star charts.
69 J. r. gold, ‘The MArS Plans for london, 1933–1942: Plurality and experimentation in the city
plans of the early British Modern Movement,’ The Town Planning Review 66(3): 243–67, 1995.
70 A. korn, M. Fry and D. Sharp, ‘The M.A.r.S. Plan for london.’ Perspecta 13/14: 163–73,
1971.
71 korn et al. ‘The M.A.r.S. Plan for london.’
72 C. n. ledoux, L’architecture considerée sous le rapport de l’art, des murs et de la législation:
volume I. g. olms, hildesheim, 1980: 135.
73 Unlike previous royal saltworks located close to the source of the salt, ledoux proposes his
close to the source of the lumber, the Chaux massif, necessary for the heating to extract salt
from brine. Art historian emil kaufmann used the second plan of Arc-et-Senans to sustain
an argument for ledoux as the first modern architect.
74 A. Vidler, ‘The ledoux effect: emil kaufmann and the claims of kantian autonomy,’ Perspecta
33 (Mining Autonomy): 16–29, 2002: 21.
75 Schapiro argued that kaufmann in fact had succeeded only in joining an architectural
principle to a social principle, one found in ledoux’s writings. ‘The correlation,’ Schapiro
wrote, ‘is with bourgeois ideology, not with the actual class structure and conditions of
bourgeois society, and depends more on quotations than on a study of social and economic
history.’ A. Vidler, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux: Architecture and Utopia in the Era of the French
Revolution, Birkhäuser – Publishers for Architecture, Basel, 2006: 43.
76 M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan Sheridan, new York:
Pantheon, 1977: 215.
77 T. Conley, The Self-made Map: Cartographic Writing in Early Modern France, University of
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Mn, 1996.
78 l. gruson. ‘Claude nicolas ledoux, Visionary Architecture and Social Utopia,’ pages 299–
307, oct. 2009. International Conference of Territorial Intelligence, hAl Archives-ouvertes.
fr. 303/653.
79 D. Felluga, ‘Modules on Foucault: on power’. ‘Introductory guide to Critical Theory’ 2011,
Purdue University accessed 14 June 2016. https://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/theory/
newhistoricism/modules/foucaultpower.html.

41
Introduction

80 Foucault, Discipline and Punish: 221.

81 Foucault, Discipline and Punish: 219.
82 Foucault, Discipline and Punish: 220.
83 Foucault, Discipline and Punish: 220.
84 gruson, ‘Claude-nicolas ledoux.’

42
References
Abbas, J. 2010, Structures for Organizing Knowledge, New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Adorno, T. W. , Adorno, G. and Tiedemann, R. 1984, Aesthetic Theory, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Alpers, S. 1983, The Art of Describing, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Appleyard, D. , Lynch, K. and Myer, J. R. 1964. The View from the Road, Joint Center for Urban Studies of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Harvard University, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Arnheim, R. 1966, Toward a Psychology of Art, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Arnheim, R. 1980, A plea for visual thinking, Critical Inquiry 6, 3: 489497.
Arnheim, R. 1986, The perception of maps, New Essays on the Psychology of Art, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Aziz, B. 1978, Maps and the mind, Human Nature 1, 8: 5059.
Bagrow, L. and Skelton, R. 1985, A. History of Cartography, 2nd edn., enlarged with additional maps and illustrations, Chicago, IL: Precedent
Publishing.
Bailey, C. and White, C. P. R. 1999, Evaluating qualitative research dealing with the tension between science and creativity, Area 31:
169183.
Bakhtin, M. M. and Holquist, M. 1981, The Dialogic Imagination, vol. 1, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Barker, R. and Barker H. A. 1988, London from the Roof of Albion Mills: A Facsimile of Robert and Henry Aston Barkers Panorama of 17923,
London Topographical Society publication 139. London: Guildhall Library Publications in association with the London Typographical Society.
Barry, J. 1992, Mappings: A Chronology or Remote Sensing, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Barthes, R. 1972, Mythologies, New York: Hill and Wang.
Barthes, R. 1872, Empire of Signs, New York: Hill and Wang.
Baudelaire, C. 1964, The Painter of Modern Life and Other Essays, New York: Garland Publishing.
Baudrillard, J. 1994, Simulacra and Simulation, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Baxandall, M. 1985, Patterns of Intention, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Behrens, R. R. 2002, False Colors, Dysart, IA: Bobolink Books.
Belyea, B. 1992, Images of power: Derrida/Foucault/Harley, Cartographica 29, 2: 19.
Benedikt, M. 1991, Cyberspace, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Benjamin, W. 1968, Illuminations, New York: Schocken Books.
265 Benjamin, W. and Tiedemann, R. 1999, The Arcades Project, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Berger, J. 1972, Ways of Seeing, New York: Viking Press.
Bertin, J. 1983, Semiology of Graphics, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bevan, W. L. , Phillott, H. W. and Havergal, F. T. 1873, Medieval Geography, London: E. Stanford.
Blachut, T. J. and Burkhardt, R. 1988, Historical Development of Photogrammetric Methods and Instruments, Falls Church, VA: American
Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.
Black, J. 1997, Maps and History, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Blaeu, J. and Goss, J. 1991, Blaeus The Grand Atlas of the 17th Century World, New York: Rizzoli.
Blakemore, M. J. , Harley, J. B. and Dahl, E. H. 1980, Concepts in the history of cartography, a review and perspective, Cartographica 17, 4:
1107.
Board, C. 1967, Models in Geography, London: Methuen.
Bonner, J. T. 1969, The Scale of Nature, New York: Harper and Row.
Borges, J. L. 1964, Dreamtigers, Austin, TX: University of Austin Press.
Borges, J. L. 1964, Labyrinths, augmented edn. New Directions Paperbook, 186, New York: New Directions Publishing.
Borges, J. L. 1972, A Universal History of Infamy, New York: Dutton.
Borges, J. L. and Hurley, A. 1998, Collected Fictions, New York: Viking.
Boyer, M. C. 1994, The City of Collective Memory, Casmbridge, MA: MIT Press.
Breckenridge, R. P. 1942, Modern Camouflage, New York: Farrar and Rinehart.
Brewer, J. and Hunter, A. 2006, Foundations of Multimethod Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Brotton, J. 1999, Terrestrial globalism: Mapping the globe in early modern Europe, in D. Cosgrove (ed.), Mappings, London: Reaktion Books.
Buddemeier, H. 1970, Panorama, Diorama, Photographie: Entstehung und Wirkung neuer Medien im 19. Jahrhundert, vol. 7, Munich: W.
Fink.
Burke, K. 1962, What are the signs of what? A theory of entitlement, Anthropological Linguistics 4: 123.
Burnett, D. G. 2000, Masters of All They Surveyed, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Butler, J. and Davies, B. 2008, Judith Butler in Conversation, New York: Routledge.
Caillois, R. , Frank, C. and Naish, C. 2003, The Edge of Surrealism, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Camp, P. 2007, Theatre optics: Enlightenment theatre architecture in France and the architectonics of Husserls phenomenology, Theatre
Journal 59, 4: 615633.
Campbell, T. 2015, Portolan charts from the late thirteenth century to 1500, History of Cartography, vol. 2, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Casey, E. S. 2002, Representing Place, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Cassirer, E. 1996, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Castells, M. 2010, The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture, vol. 1, The Rise of the Network Society, 2nd edn, Chichester: Wiley-
Blackwell.
Cerruti, M. 1978, Roma Interrotta Incontri Internazionali dArte , Rome, MayJune.
Chesney, C. H. R. and Huddlestone, J. 1943, The Art of Camouflage, New York: Studio Publications, Transatlantic Arts.
Chicoteau, Y. and Picon, A. 1982, Forme, technique et ideologie: les ingnieurs des ponts et chausses a la fin du XVIIe sicle, Culture
Technique 7: 193194.
266 Chorley, R. J. and Haggett, P. 1967, Models in Geography, vol. 2, London: Methuen.
Chorley, R. J. and Haggett, P. 1969, Physical and Information Models in Geography: Parts I, II, and V of Models in Geography, London:
Methuen.
Cloke, P. J. , Philo, C. and Sadler, D. 1991, Approaching Human Geography, New York: Guilford Press.
Conley, T. 1966, The Self-made Map, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Cosgrove, D. E. 1985, Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape, Totowa, NJ: Barnes and Noble Books.
Cosgrove, D. E. 1999, Mappings, London: Reaktion Books.
Cosgrove, D. E. 2001, Apollos Eye, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Cosgrove, D. E. 2005, Maps, mapping, modernity: Art and cartography in the twentieth century, Imago Mundi 57, 1: 3554.
Cosgrove, D. E. 2006, Geographical Imagination and the Authority of Images, Hettner-Lecture, Stuttgart: Steiner.
Cosgrove, D. E. 2008, Geography and Vision, International Library of Human Geography 12, London: I.B. Tauris.
Crampton, J. W. 2003, The Political Mapping of Cyberspace, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Crampton, J. W. 2009, Cartography: maps 2.0, Progress in Human Geography 33, 1: 91100.
Crampton, J. W. 2010, Mapping: A Critical Introduction to Cartography and GIS, Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World, Chichester:
BPS Blackwell.
Crampton, J. W. and Elden, S. 2007, Space, Knowledge and Power, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Crampton, J. W. and Krygier, J. 2006, An introduction to critical cartography, ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 4, 1:
1133.
Crary, J. 1990, Techniques of the Observer, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Crary, J. and Kwinter, S. 1992, Incorporations, New York: Zone.
Crone, G. R. 1953, Maps and Their Makers, Hutchinsons University Library, Geography series, London: Hutchinson.
Damisch, H. 1994, The Origin of Perspective, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Darlington, I. and Howgego, J. L. 1964, Printed Maps of London circa 15531850, London: G. Philip.
Daston, L. 2004, Things that Talk, New York: Zone Books.
Daston, L. 2008, On scientific observation, Isis 99: 97110.
Daston, L. and Galison, P. 2007, Objectivity, New York: Zone Books.
Dave, B. 2007, Space, sociality, and pervasive computing, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 34: 381382.
Debord, G. 1994, Society of the Spectacle, New York: Zone Books.
Debord, G. 1990, Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, London: Verso.
Del Casino, V. J. and Hanna, S. P. 2000, Representations and identities in tourism map spaces, Progress in Human Geography 24, 1: 2346.
Deleuze, G. 1984, Kants Critical Philosophy, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1983, Anti-Oedipus, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1987, A Thousand Plateaus, London: Athlone Press.
267 della Francesco, Piero and Nicco Fasola, G. 1984, De prospectiva pingendi, Forence: Le Lettere.
Derrida, J. 1976, Of Grammatology, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Derrida, J. 1978, Edmund Husserls Origin of Geometry, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Descargues, P. 1976, Perspective, New York: H. N. Abrams.
Descartes, R. 1971, Philosophical Writing, Library of Liberal Arts 198, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Descartes, R. 1972, Discours de la mthode: Avec des aperus sur le mouvement des ides avant Descartes, une biographie chronologique,
une introduction de loeuvre, une analyse mthodique du Discours, des notes, des questions et des documents, edited by J. M. Fataud ,
Univers des Lettres 236, Paris: Bordas.
Dilke, O. A. W. 2015, Itineraries and geographical maps in the early and late Roman Empires, History of Cartography, vol. 1, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Dodge, M. 2011, Classics in Cartography, Chichester: J. Wiley and Sons.
Dodge, M. and Kitchin, R. 2004, Flying through code/space: The real virtuality of air travel, Environment and Planning A 36: 195211.
Dodge, M. and Kitchin, R. 2007, Outlines of a world coming into existence: pervasive computing and the ethics of forgetting, Environment
and Planning B: Planning and Design 34: 431444.
Dodge, M. and Kitchin, R. 2016, Atlas of Cyberspaces, London: Addison-Wesley.
Dodge, M. , Kitchin, R. and Perkins, C. R. 2011, The Map Reader, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Doel, M. A. 1999, Poststructuralist Geographies, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Dorling, D. and Fairbairn, D. 1997, Mapping, Harlow: Longman.
Downs, R. M. and Stea, D. 1973, Image and Environment, Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Downs, R. M. and Stea, D. 1977, Maps in Minds, New York: Harper and Row.
Duhem, P. M. M. 1906, Etudes sur Leonardo da Vinci, Paris: A. Hermann.
Duhem, P. M. M. and Ariew, R. 1985, Medieval Cosmology, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Eames, C. , Eames, R. , Bernstein, E. , Morrison, P. and Peck, G. 1990, Powers of Ten: A Film Dealing with the Relative Size of Things in
the Universe and the Effect of Adding Another Zero, Santa Monica, CA: Pyramid Film and Video.
Edgerton, S. Y. 1975, The Renaissance Rediscovery of Linear Perspective, New York: Basic Books.
Edgerton, S. Y. 2009, The Mirror, the Window, and the Telescope, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Edney, M. H. 1997, Mapping an Empire, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Edson, E. 1997, Mapping Time and Space, London: British Library.
Elliot, J. 1987, The City in Maps, London: British Library.
Evans, R. 1995, The Projective Cast, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Evans, R. 1997, Translations from Drawing to Building, vol. 2, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Farinelli, F. 1998, Did Anaximander ever say (or write) any words? The nature of cartographical reason, Ethics, Place, and Environment 1, 2:
135144.
Farman, J. 2012, Mobile Interface Theory, New York: Routledge.
Fichte, J. G. , Heath, P. and Lachs, J. 1970, Science of Knowledge (Wissenschaftslehre) with the First and Second introductions, Century
Philosophy Sourcebooks, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
268 Forseth, K. 1984, Glide Projection, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Foucault, M. 1970, The Order of Things, New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, M. 1972, The Archaeology of Knowledge, New York: Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. 1977, Discipline and Punish, New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, M. 1986, Of other spaces, Diacritics 16, 1: 2227.
Foucault, M. and Gordon, C. 1980, Power/Knowledge, New York: Pantheon Books.
Fuller, R. B. and Kuromiya, K. 1992, Cosmography, New York: Macmillan.
Gaiman, N. 2006, Fragile Things, New York: William Morrow.
Galison, P. 1997, Image and Logic, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Galison, P. 2008, Ten problems in the history and philosophy of science, Isis 99, 1: 111124.
Galison, P. and Stump, D. J. 1996, The Disunity of Science, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Gatrell, A. C. 1983, Distance and Space, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gernsheim, H. and Gernsheim, A. 1968, L. J. M. Daguerre, New York: Dover Publications.
Giere, R. N. 2006, Understanding Scientific Reasoning, 5th edn, Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Gold, J. R. 1995, The M.A.R.S. Plans for London, 19331942: Plurality and experimentation in the city plans of the early British modern
movement, The Town Planning Review 66, 3: 243267.
Gombrich, E. H. 1960, Art and Illusion, Bollingen series 35, The A. W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts 5, New York: Pantheon Books.
Goodman, N. 1968, Languages of Art, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Goodman, N. 1978, Ways of Worldmaking, Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Gould, P. 1966, On Mental Maps, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Gould, P. 1969, The new geography, Harpers Magazine, March, 91100.
Gould, P. 1975, People in Information Space: The Mental Maps and Information Surfaces of Sweden, Lund: Gleerup.
Greenberg, C. and OBrian, J. 1993, The Collected Essays and Criticism, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Gregory, D. 1994, Geographical Imaginations, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Gregory, D. and Castree, N. 2012. Human Geography, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Gregory, D. and Urry, J. 1985, Social Relations and Spatial Structures, New York: St. Martins Press.
Gregory, D. , Martin, R. and Smith, G. 1994, Human Geography, New York: University of Minnesota Press.
Gregory, R. L. 1970, The Intelligent Eye, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Gregory, R. L. 1990, Eye and Brain, 4th ed, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gruson, L. 2008, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, visionary architecture and social utopia, International Conference of Territorial Intelligence,
Besanon, France: HAL Archives-Ouvertes: 299307.
Guelke, L. (ed.) 1977, The Nature of Cartographic Communication, special issue of Cartographica Monograph 19.
Guy, G. 2016, Theatre, Exhibition, and Curation, Routledge Advances in Theatre and Performance Studies 46, London: Routledge.
Habermas, J. 1988, On the Logic of the Social Sciences, Cambridge: Polity Press.
269 Haggett, P. 1990, The Geographers Art, Oxford: Blackwell, Oxford.
Hall, S. S. 1992, Mapping the Next Millennium, New York: Random House.
Halpern, O. 2015. Beautiful Data Experimental Futures, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Hanna, S. P. and Del Casino, V. J. 2003, Mapping Tourism, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Harbison, R. 1977, Eccentric Spaces, Boston, MA: D.R. Godine.
Hardison, O. B. 1989, Disappearing Through the Skylight, New York: Viking.
Harley, J. B. 1975, Ordnance Survey Maps, Southampton: Ordnance Survey.
Harley, J. B. 1988, Silences and secrecy, Imago Mundi 40: 5776.
Harley, J. B. 1989, Deconstructing the map, Cartographica 26, 2: 120.
Harley, J. B. 1989, Historical geography and the cartographic illusion, Journal of Historical Cartography 15: 8091.
Harley, J. B. and Laxton, P. 2001, The New Nature of Maps, Baltimare, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Harley, J. B. and Woodward, D. 1987, Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Harley, J. B. and Woodward, D. 1992, Cartography in the Traditional Islamic and South Asian Societies, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Harley, J. B. , Woodward, D. and Monmonier, M. S. 2015, The History of Cartography, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Harvey, D. 1969, Explanation in Geography, London: Edward Arnold.
Harvey, D. 1989, The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford: Blackwell.
Harvey, M. 1979, Piranesi, New York: Harmony Books.
Harvey, P. D. A. 1993, Maps in Tudor England, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Heidegger, M. 1960, Essays in Metaphysics, New York: Wisdom Library, Philosophical Library.
Heidegger, M. 1992, History of the Concept of Time, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Heidegger, M. and Krell, D. F. 1993, Basic Writings, (1927) to The Task of Thinking (1964), rev. and expanded edn, San Francisco, CA:
HarperSanFrancisco.
Held, D. 1980, Introduction to Critical Theory, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Helmholtz, H. von , and Southall, J. P. C. 1925, Helmholtzs Treatise on Physiological Optics, New York: The Optical Society of America.
Hey, T. , Tansley, S. and Tolle, K. (eds) 2009. The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery., Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Research.
Hillis, K. 1999, Digital Sensations, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Hollevoet, C. 1992, Wandering in the city: Flanerie to drive and after: The cognitive mapping of urban space, The Power of the City/The City
of Power, New York: The Whitney Museum of American Art.
Husserl, E. , Breda, H. L. v. , IJsseling, S. and Boehm, R. 2003, Husserliana: Gesammelte Werke, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Ivins, W. M. and Plerin, J. 1973, On the Rationalization of Sight, New York: Da Capo Press.
James, W. 2003, Essays in Radical Empiricism, Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Jameson, D. , Hurvich, L. M. and Alpern, M. 1972, Visual Psychophysics, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Jameson, F. 1990, Signatures of the Visible, New York: Routledge.
270 Jay, M. 1993, Downcast Eyes, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Johnson, H. B. 1976, Order Upon the Land, The Andrew H. Clark Series in the Historical Geography of North America, New York: Oxford
University Press.
Johnston, R. J. , Gregory, D. and Smith, D. M. 1994, The Dictionary of Human Geography, 3rd edn, Oxford: Blackwell Reference.
Jones, C. A. , Galison, P. and Slaton, A. E. 1998, Picturing Science, Producing Art, New York: Routledge.
Kain, R. J. P. and Baigent, E. 1992, The Cadastral Map in the Service of the State, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kaufmann, E. 1936, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux: A pioneer of modern architecture in the eighteenth century, Parnassus 8, 5: 1618.
Kemp, M. 1981, Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvelous Works of Nature and Man, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Kennedy, J. and Yorke, J. A. 1991, Basins of Wada, Physica D 51: 213225.
Kepes, G. 1944, Language of Vision, Chicago, IL: P. Theobald.
Kepes, G. 1965, Education of Vision, Vision+Value Series, New York: G. Braziller.
Kepes, G. 1965, The Nature and Art of Motion, Vision+Value Series, New York: G. Braziller.
Kepes, G. 1965, Structure in Art and in Science, Vision + Value Series, New York: G. Braziller.
Kepes, G. 1966, Sign, Image, Symbol, Vision+Value Series, New York: G. Braziller.
Kerouac, J. 1991, On the Road, New York: Penguin Books.
Khader, J. 2013, Cartographies of Transnationalism in Postcolonial Feminisms, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Klein, U. , and Lefvre, W. 2007 Materials in Eighteenth-Century Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Knabb, K. 1981, Situationist International Anthology, Berkeley, CA: Bureau of Public.
Knigge, L. and Cope, M. 2006, Grounded visualization: integrating the analysis of qualitative and quantitative data through grounded theory
and visualization, Environment and Planning A 38: 20212037.
Konvitz, J. W. 1985, The Urban Millennium, Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Korn, A. , Maxwell, F. and Dennis, S. 1971, The M.A.R.S. Plan for London, Perspecta 13/14: 163173.
Korzybski, A. 1941, Science and Sanity, 2nd edn, Lakeville, CT: The International Non-Aristotelian Library Publishing Company.
Korzybski, A. and Keyser, C. J. 1950, Manhood of Humanity, 2nd edn, Lakeville, CT: International Non-Aristotelian Library Publishing
Company.
Krauss, R. E. 1993, The Optical Unconscious, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Krautheimer, R. 1956, Lorenzo Ghiberti, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kreuziger, F. A. 1986, The Religion of Science Fiction, Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
Kuhn, J. R. 1990, Measured appearances: Documentation and design in early perspective drawing, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld
Institutes 53: 114132.
Kurgan, L. 2013, Close up at a Distance: Mapping, Technology, and Politics, first hardcover edition MIT Press, 2013.
Kurokawa, K. 1992, Kisho Kurokawa, London: Academy Editions.
271 Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1999, Philosophy in the Flesh, New York: Basic Books.
Lambe, P. 2007, Organizing Knowledge, Oxford: Chandos.
Landow, G. P. 1992, Hypertext. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Latour, B. 1987, Science in Action, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. 1993, We Have Never Been Modern, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Ledoux, C.-N. 1980, Larchitecture considere sous le rapport de lart, des moeurs et de la lgislation, Hildesheim: G. Olms.
Lefebvre, H. 1971, Everyday Life in the Modern World, London: Allen Lane.
Lefebvre, H. 1991, The Production of Space, Oxford: Blackwell.
Lefebvre, H. 2004, Rhythm Analysis, London: Continuum.
Lemagny, J.-C. 1968, Visionary Architects, Houston, TX: Gulf Print Co.
Lestringant, F. 1934, Mapping the Renaissance World, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Limb, M. and Dwyer, C. 2001, Qualitative Methodologies for Geographers, London: Arnold.
Lin, Z. 2010, Kenzo Tange and the Metabolist Movement, New York: Routledge.
Lwin, K. K. , Murayama, Y. and Mizutani, C. 2012, Quantitative versus qualitative geospatial data in spatial modeling and decision making,
Journal of Geographic Information System 4: 237241.
Lynch, K. 1960, The Image of the City, The Joint Center for Urban Studies, Cambridge: Technology Press.
Lynch, K. 1961, The form of cities, Scientific American 190, 4: 5563.
Lynch, K. 1961, The pattern of the metropolis, Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Winter, 7998.
Lynch, K. 1972, What Time Is this Place? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lynch, K. 1981, Good City Form, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lynch, K. , Banerjee, T. and Southworth, M. 1990, City Sense and City Design, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lyotard, J.-F. 1984, The Postmodern Condition, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
MacEachren, A. M. 1994, Some Truth with Maps, Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers.
MacEachren, A. M. 1995, How Maps Work, New York: Guilford Press.
MacEachren, A. M. and Taylor, D. R. F. 1994, Visualization in Modern Cartography, Oxford, Pergamon.
Mach, E. 1897, Popular Scientific Lectures, Chicago, IL: Open Court.
Mach, E. 1959, The Analysis of Sensations, and the Relation of the Physical to the Psychical, New York: Dover Publications.
Mach, E. and McCormack, T. J. 1906, Space and Geometry in the Light of Physiological, Psychological and Physical Inquiry, Chicago, IL:
The Open Court Publishing Company.
Mann, M. 1993, The Sources of Social Power, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Massey, D. B. 1994, Space, Place, and Gender, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Massey, L. 2003, The Treatise on Perspective, Studies in the History of Art 59, Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art.
Mattelart, A. 1999, Mapping modernity: Utopia and communications networks in D. Cosgrove (ed.), Mappings, London: Reaktion Books.
McDonough, T. 2009, The Situationists and the City, London: Verso.
272 McEwen, I. K. 1993, Socrates Ancestor, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McGuinness, B. 2011, Friedrich Waismann, Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook 15, Dordrecht: Springer.
Mercator, G. , Hondius, J. , Jansson, J. and Skelton, R. A. 1968, Atlas; or, a geographicke description of the world: Amsterdam 1636,
Amsterdan: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum.
Merleau-Ponty, M. and Lefort, C. 1968, The Visible and the Invisible, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Michaels, C. F. and Carello, C. 1981, Direct Perception, Century Psychology Series, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Molyneaux, B. 1997, The Cultural Life of Images, Theoretical Archaeology Group (TAG), London: Routledge.
Monmonier, M. S. 1977, Maps, Distortion, and Meaning, Association of American Geographers Resource Paper 754, Washington, DC:
Association of American Geographers.
Monmonier, M. S. 1985, Technological Transition in Cartography, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Monmonier, M. S. 1991, How to Lie with Maps, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Monmonier, M. S. 1993, Mapping It Out, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Monmonier, M. S. 1995, Drawing the Line, New York: H. Holt.
Monmonier, M. S. 2008, Coast Lines, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Monmonier, M. S. and Schnell, G. A. 1988, Map Appreciation, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Montello, D. R. 2002, Cognitive map-design research in the twentieth century: Theoretical and empirical approaches, Cartography and
Geographic Information Science 29, 3: 283304.
More, T. and Roper, W. 1903, Utopia, The Chiswick Library of Noble Authors, New York: Scott-Thaw Co.
Morville, P. 2005, Ambient Findability, Beijing: OReilly.
Mumford, E. P. 2000, The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 19281960, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mumford, L. 1967, The Myth of the Machine, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Mundy, B. E. 1996, The Mapping of New Spain, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Newman, W. E. 1998, Space, place and the ideology of the map, PhD thesis, Harvard University.
Newman, W. E. 2005, Review of Representing Place: Landscape Painting and Maps CCA Reviews.
http://www.caareviews.org/reviews/766#.WIWVA7YrJyo
Newman, W. E. 2013, Mapping as applied research, in N. S. C. Jarrett , and K.-H. Kim (eds), The Visibility of Research Architectural
Research Centers Consortium, Charlotte, NC: University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Newman, W. E. 2014, Space and/or place in early atlases, Environment, Space and Place 1: 125151.
Newman, W. E. in press, Twentieth-century theory in architecture, Sage Encyclopedia of Theory
Noffsinger, J. P. 1979, Kisho Noriaki Kurokawa, Metabolist Pioneer of Japan, Monticello, IL: Vance Bibliographies.
Nolli, G. , Ceen, A. and Nolli, G. 1984, Rome 1748: The Pianta grande di Roma of Giambattista Nolli in facsimile; with an introductory essay
by Allan Ceen, Highmount, NY: J.H. Aronson.
Nutti, L. 1999, Mapping places: Chorography and vision in the Renaissance, in D. Cosgrove (ed.) Mappings, London: Reaktion Books.
273 OHagan, T. 1999, Rousseau, London: Routledge, London.
Olsson, G. 1965, Distance and Human Interaction, Philadelphia, PA: Regional Science Research Institute.
Olsson, G. 1971, Spatial Sampling: A Technique for Acquisition of Geographic Data from Aerial Photographs and Maps: Final Report, Fort
Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Engineer Topographic Laboratories.
Olsson, G. 1991, Lines of Power/Limits of Language, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Olsson, G. 2007, Abysmal, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Ortelius, A. and Skelton, R. A. 1968, The Theatre of the Whole World: London, 1606, Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum.
Padovan, R. 1999, Proportion, London: E and FN Spon.
Palmer, J. and Dodson, M. 1996, Design and Aesthetics, New York: Routledge.
Panofsky, E. 1943, Albrecht Durer, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Panofsky, E. 1954, Galileo as a Critic of the Arts, The Hague: Matrinus Nijhoff.
Panofsky, E. 1991, Perspective as Symbolic Form, New York: Zone Books.
Peattie, R. 1942, How to Read Military Maps, New York: G.W. Stewart.
Prez Gmez, A. 1983, Architecture and the Crisis of Modern Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Prez Gmez, A. and Pelletier, L. 1997, Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Philip, L. J. 1998, Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to social research in human geography an impossible mixture?
Environment and Planning A 30: 261276.
Pickles, J. 1980, Geography and Humanism, CATMOG 44, Norwich: Geo Books.
Pickles, J. 1985, Phenomenology, Science, and Geography, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pickles, J. 2004, History of Spaces, London: Routledge.
Picon, A. 1992, French Architects and Engineers in the Age of Enlightenment, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Picon, A. and Ponte, A. 2003, Architecture and the Sciences, New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Poster, M. 1990, The Mode of Information, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Ramsay, R. H. 1972, No Longer on the Map, New York: Viking Press.
Reynolds, J. M. 2001, Ise shrine and a modernist construction of Japanese tradition, The Art Bulletin 83, 2: 316341.
R. Rovira, W.E. Newman and J. Stuart , Atlas Mar, Florida International University, Advanced Studio: Parks for the People, 2012, sponsored
by the Van Alen Institute and the National Parks Service.
Robinson, A. H. 1962, Mapping the correspondence of isarithmic maps, Annals of the Association of American Geographers 52, 4: 414425.
Robinson, A. H. 1982, Early Thematic Mapping in the History of Cartography, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Robinson, A. H. 1984, Elements of Cartography, 5th edn, New York: Wiley.
Robinson, A. H. and Petchenik, B. B. 1976, The Nature of Maps, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
274 Roskam, A. 1987, Dazzle Painting, Rotterdam: Stichting Kunstprojecten.
Rossi, A. and Eisenman, P. 1982, The Architecture of the City, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rowe, C. 1976, The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa and Other Essays, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rowe, C. and Hejduk, J. 1957, Lockhart, Texas, Architectural Record 121, 3: 201206.
Rowe, C. and Koetter, F. 1978, Collage City, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sadler, S. 1998, The Situationist City, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Salomon, A. 1947, Karl Mannheim, 18931947, Social Research 14: 350.
Sauer, T. and Scholl, R. (eds) 2016, The Philosophy of Historical Case Studies, Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science
319, New York: Springer.
Simmel, G. , Frisby, D. and Featherstone, M. 1997, Simmel on Culture, Theory, Culture and Society, London: Sage Publications.
Sivin, N. and Scope, G. L. 1994, Introduction to East Asian cartography, in History of Cartography, vol. II, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Skelton, R. A. 1965, Looking at an Early Map, University of Kansas Publications Library Series 17, Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas
Libraries.
Skelton, R. A. 1972, Maps, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Slocum, T. A. 1999, Thematic Cartography and Visualization, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Snyder, J. P. 1993, Flattening the Earth, Chicago, IL University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1993.
Snyder, J. P. , and Voxland, P. M. 1989, An album of map projections, Professional Paper 1453, USGS,
https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp1453.
Soja, E. W. 1996, Thirdspace, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Sonenberg, M. 1990, Cartographies, New York: Ecco Press.
Stein, H. F. and Niederland, W. G. 1989, Maps from the Mind, Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Steiner, H. A. 2009, Beyond Archigram, New York: Routledge.
Sutton, P. 1988, Dreamings, New York: G. Braziller in association with Asia Society Galleries.
Tagg, J. 1988, The Burden of Representation, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
Tange, K. 1961, Plan for Tokyo, 1960: Toward a Structural Reorganization, Tokyo: Shikenchikusha.
Tange, K. and Kawazoe, N. 1965, Ise: Prototype of Japanese Architecture, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Thayer, G. H. and Thayer, A. H. 1909, Concealing: Coloration in the Animal Kingdom, New York: Macmillan.
Thorndike, L. 1923, A History of Magic and Experimental Science, New York: Macmillan.
Thrower, N. J. W. and Thrower, N. J. W. 1996, Maps and Civilization, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Toulmin, S. 1953, The Philosophy of Science, London: Hutchinson.
Toulmin, S. and Goodfield, J. 1962, The Architecture of Matter, New York: Harper and Row.
Trachtenberg, M. 1998, What Brunelleschi saw: Monument and site at the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence, Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians 47, 1: 1444.
Tufte, E. R. 1970, The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Tufte, E. R. 1983, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Tufte, E. R. 1990, Envisioning Information, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
275 Tufte, E. R. 1997, Visual Explanations, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Tufte, E. R. 2006, Beautiful Evidence, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Turnbull, D. and Watson, H. 1993, Maps are Territories, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Vattimo, G. 1988, The End of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press in association with Basil Blackwell.
Vattimo, G. 1992, The Transparent Society, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Veltman, K. H. and Keele, K. D. 1986, Linear Perspective and the Visual Dimensions of Science and Art, vol. 1, Munich: Deutscher
Kunstverlag.
Vidler, A. 1991, Researching revolutionary architecture, Journal of Architectural Education 44, 4: 206210.
Vidler, A. 2000, Warped Space, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vidler, A. 2002, The Ledoux Effect: Emil Kaufmann and the claims of Kantian autonomy, Perspecta 33, Mining Autonomy: 1629.
Vidler, A. and Ledoux, C.-N. 1988, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, Basel: Birkhauser, Publishers for Architecture.
Wilford, J. N. 1982, The Mapmakers, New York: Vintage Books, New York.
Willard, D. 1991, Verso una teoria fenomenologica della verit come corrispondenza (Toward a phenomenology for the correspondence
theory of truth appears), Discipline Filosofiche 1: 125147.
Wittkower, R. 1973, Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, 4th edn, London: Academy.
Wood, D. and Fels, J. 1992, The Power of Maps, New York: Guilford Press.
Wood, D. and Fels, J. 2008, The Natures of Maps, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Wood, D. , Fels, J. and Krygier, J. 2010, Rethinking the Power of Maps, New York: Guilford Press.
Woodward, D. 1987, Art and Cartography, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Woodward, D. and Lewis, G. M. 1998, Cartography in the Traditional African, American, Arctic, Australian, and Pacific Societies, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Wright, J. K. 1966, Human Nature in Geography, 19251965, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.