Rethinking Cartography: The Call for a Mapping Revolution

In May, President Donald Trump sparked a debate about cartography and national borders when he referred to the U.S.-Canada border as an "artificial line" drawn with a ruler. His comments suggested that the map of North America would be more aesthetically pleasing without this boundary, highlighting a broader discussion about how maps shape our understanding of geography and human connections.

The Guardian

Historian William Rankin of Yale University traces the current perception of maps back to 18th-century British cartographers, who created "jigsaw-puzzle maps" for the education of the aristocracy. These maps, which depicted countries with clear-cut frontiers, have influenced modern mapping practices and contributed to a simplistic view of global geography. Rankin argues that this approach damages our understanding of countries and the inequalities within them.

The Guardian

In response to critiques of traditional mapping, political geographer Henk van Houtum of Radboud University advocates for a "mapping revolution." He proposes replacing state-centric maps with those that emphasize human mobility and connections. This shift aims to challenge the notion of homogeneity often depicted in maps, particularly in the context of migration, which has historically been illustrated with alarming arrows suggesting invasion.

The Guardian

Frontex, Europe’s border and coastguard agency, has begun to adapt its migratory maps by replacing menacing arrows with circles of varying sizes, reflecting a less alarmist narrative. Rankin's work, particularly in his book "Radical Cartography," showcases maps that challenge dominant narratives, such as one that illustrates European exploration by highlighting previously uninhabited areas rather than colonial conquests.

The Guardian

Critics of traditional mapping practices argue that they often obscure the realities of marginalized communities. For instance, in the 1980s, pavement dwellers in Mumbai successfully used mapping to resist eviction, while civil rights activists in the U.S. employed similar tactics to highlight inequality. However, even contemporary maps can misrepresent realities, as seen in a 2012 Lancet publication that was criticized for focusing on poorer regions as disease hotspots while neglecting the role of wealthier nations in shaping these patterns.

The Guardian

Both Rankin and van Houtum emphasize that the perfect map is unattainable. The Mercator projection, created in the 16th century, exemplifies this challenge, as it distorts landmass sizes, particularly near the poles. Despite its flaws, the Mercator projection has regained popularity in digital applications, illustrating the ongoing tension between utility and accuracy in cartography.

The Guardian

Rankin advocates for a new approach to cartography that embraces uncertainty and multiplicity rather than striving for neutrality. He believes that acknowledging the imperfections in mapping can lead to a more nuanced understanding of the world.

The Guardian

• “I think that does real damage, not just to how we understand those countries, but to how we understand inequality,” — William Rankin, Historian, Yale University

The Guardian

• “The faceless, massive arrow is primarily the perspective of the state,” — Henk van Houtum, Political Geographer, Radboud University

The Guardian

• “Rather than aspire to neutrality, objectivity and sharp distinctions, map-makers should embrace uncertainty, subjectivity and multiplicity.” — William Rankin, Historian, Yale University

The Guardian

As discussions about the role of maps in society continue, educators and cartographers are encouraged to rethink their approaches, potentially leading to a more inclusive and accurate representation of the world. The ongoing evolution of mapping practices reflects a growing awareness of the complexities of geography and human experience.

The Guardian