Maps portray a landscape from an aerial view — and yet they can avoid the meaning and history, or iconography, behind the landscape. Landscapes can come in all different forms; they can be “in paint on canvas, in writing on paper, in earth” etc. In their Iconography and Landscape, Stephen Daniels and Denis Cosgrove said, “Indeed the meanings of verbal, visual and built landscapes have a complex interwoven history”. Well, I believe many maps fail to carry on the portrayal of “interwoven history”.
The map I looked at last week in Colby’s Special Collections room was created by The Atlas of the World. The map was of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island and had a title of something along the lines of ‘Christopher Columbus’s Discovery of the Americas’. The title carries so much weight in regards to the history and meaning behind the landscape that the map is attempting to portray. However, there is nothing else on the map that helps the viewer to understand the iconography behind the true landscape that Columbus stumbled upon and discovered. In fact, the map uses its extra space to advertise the company – The Atlas of the World – rather than inform the viewer of the important material and story behind the map and therefore behind the landscape. I know it is difficult for maps to discuss the iconography of the landscape it is portraying because it is an aerial view with no depth (i.e., no foreground or background). But they should at least use the space around the map to expand on the title and share the symbolic and historical importance behind the landscape that sits within the map.