An Agent’s Guide to Mapping

When it comes to defining and understanding the city and our environments, mapping has been the path of least resistance. It is often a direct representation of relationships from a birds-eye-view. This is not to say mapping is a simple tool. Mapping also offers us the flexibility to observe in complex and abstract ways.

Joaquin Torres-Garcia questions our North Hemisphere-centric view of the world in Upside-down Map, 1943.

Architects use this tool all the time. The first step is quantitative - aerial photos, road maps, figure grounds, and other means of objectively understanding a site and its context. This allows us to gain our bearings and understand what type of qualitative analysis we wish to perform.

If you think about it, mapping might always be this two part process from quantitative representation to qualitative interpretation. Take road maps for example, arguably the most common type of map. They provide a 2-D representation of the organization of streets and highways. This allows the user to plot alternative travel directions. You are probably familiar with the qualitative considerations from using route or travel planning sites. They allow you to prepare a trip that avoids transfers between means of transportation, skip toll roads if you’d rather chance the traffic than pay a fee, or take the scenice route if you have more time and want to see the landscape.

Satellite view of Manhattan, a representation of information visible to the eye restricting the relationships conveyed to that of geography.

Road map of Manhattan, a representation of information related to driving and the organization of roads, streets, and highways to major natural landmarks. Courtesy of Google Maps.

It is with this breakdown in mind - quantitative vs. qualitative - that I intend to approach the understanding of cities through mapping. Don’t be fooled by the simple division of labels, however. Both types of mapping can also engage the fourth dimension of time to determine the static or dynamic nature of that being observed. My point here is to create a simple first round of categorization, or level playing field across which maps can be discussed in relation to one another. After that is established, then we can break down the methods into their finer points.

Thus, as such an important tool to understanding our world, I will be regularly posting maps or links about mapping that add to this discussion. Feel free, and please submit any relevant links you think would be important to bring to the discussion of mapping.

In the meantime, please enjoy this website - Maps Over Time. The site allows you to choose a map of Boston as a base layer, upon which you begin to “paint” in brush stroke manner older maps on top of the initial one. The idea is to see how the coastline of Boston has constantly changed over time in a man-made way.

1775 Map of Boston and Environs. Courtesy of Maps Over Time.

Next mapping post: P.O.L.I.S. MyMiniCity

If you enjoyed this post, please leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Powered by Wordpress | WP Premium theme by WP Remix
Copyright 2007. agents of urbanism. All rights reserved

• Home
• About
• Archives
• Glossary
• Poll Archive
• Sitemap