Barton & Barton- "Ideology and the Map"

Summary

Ben and Marthalee Barton attempt to illustrate the need for a “neutral” view of reality via maps and other visual representations. Within the excerpt, they not only outline the disparities within the conventions of maps; they highlight the possible cultural and social criticism that, “the map is seen as complicit with social-control mechanisms inextricably linked to power and authority” (53). This statement frequently refers to the denaturalization of Kuwait as an example. In some maps Kuwait may be listed as the 19^th province of Iraq, which denies its national autonomy. In this sense, maps created by the people in positions of power are biased. As consumers of maps, the public is inadvertently acceding to the terms of the producer.

Barton and Barton explain this to the layman as rules of inclusion and exclusion. In addition, they reason that the bias in map distortions could be due to the ‘omphalos syndrome’, which describes how people believe themselves to be divinely appointed to the center of the universe (55). This is evident in the Mercator map, as Russia’s size appears nearly 3 times that of Africa, when Africa’s actual area is greater. Barton and Barton suggest that this is due to the sectional interests of the white colonialist powers (55). The frequent use of rhetorical questions, literary references, and use of 1^st person point of view draws the common audience into the subject matter. The persuasive writing is in the form of a proposal, urging for a more inclusionary visual design practice.

Inquiry

Barton and Barton’s views on maps and the rules of exclusion and inclusion were thought-provoking when they did not sound like conspiracy theories. I agree with their sentiments in saying that maps as visual representations are subject to being a method of control by those in power. Barton and Barton claim that, “feature maps…do not show us what is undesirable. We never see slums, buildings in poor condition, suggestions of danger. The feature map is an optimistic world view, an image which focuses on only the positive aspects of life…”(56). Although I agree with the statement, I don’t believe it is applicable to our lives in the United States. I will use China’s censorship practices as an example.

In certain circumstances, China has exercised government power in attempts to neutralize public opinion through banning instant messaging services, re-editing film, and overall limiting speech and expression. (Here is a graphic that illustrates censorship: http://infobeautiful.s3.amazonaws.com/what-does-china-censor-online.gif) In a way, their intention is to block any ‘undesirable’ facets of the government. This is a regression from Barton and Barton’s proposal of including more people in the visual design practice. An authority is responsible for the severe censorship and manipulation of new media. This distortion translates to what some people may believe as true. By limiting the participation of individuals, the scope of the world is obstructed.

1. The literature described how Australian children view maps with the Northern Hemisphere as ‘upside-down’ as an example of a rule of inclusion, specifically privileging. What is another example of a rule of inclusion?
2. How is New Media a social-control mechanism?
3. How could New Media, specifically forms of visual representation in 2010, fortify Barton and Barton’s arguments?