Modern maps are boring
Maps without details appeal to the most amount of people. The lack of markers gives more appeal to interpretation. The color of a house door is only interesting to whoever lives there.
A random spot makes this point. From Google maps, I took this screenshot of a city street nearby to where I am writing this at the moment.
A major road divides the landscape. Smaller roads lead to it, and away from it. Snaking water appears and disappears. Grey spaces between could be cement, trees, dessert, Google leaves us to our best guesses.
Details appeal to the fewest number of people.
But, have maps always been like this? The answer is no. This map of 1931 San Francisco is wonderful.
Golden rich yellows painted like a Piccaso across the map’s edges. Street names placed in obscure locations. In-service only of the artistic renderings of the people living here. It is an art piece and a craft forgotten by modern map-makers.
But why are maps as boring as Google’s?
Locals don’t make them
Science a well-known respected magazine of, and about science. An estimate claims 2.4 million could make maps instead of the five-hundred thousand in the field. Those in the field will not waste their efforts on rural small towns. As they might have with the largest Chinese enclave in North America. (At the time of the San Francisco map creation.) Getting small towns great maps means shifting economic incentives. Increasing people with the required skills.
Where are incentives now?
This leads to a broader discussion of economic realities, and I won’t be having that discussion. It is too nuanced and broad to delve into the world of macro-economics. Instead, we will focus on the micro.
The National Geographic magazine is another well-known- and respected magazine in the field. (of map-making.) It creates an award show of the best maps. This gives us a look at the best people in the field. This gives us an idea of where the people inside of the field are operating.
Imagine the Oscars but without the media coverage. Understanding where the talent goes helps us understand how change might happen.
What is the first thing you notice? It’s covering a large amount of land, like our San Francisco map. This will hold true with almost every map. As a single map-maker profiting off of thirty thousand makes more sense. But what makes this map art instead of a utility?
It moves, it has a pulse unlike our Google Maps. The wolves are stalking on their paws. The hunters are walking through the woods, the park rangers cleaning up after hikers.
Does this have value for someone who is not going to the park? It serves a dual purpose of information and dynamism. What about maps with almost no information?
Looking at the Alaskan range it is once again of a large area. Incentives still matter. But notice how the mountains are tall of different sizes standing some out. They are above the foreground giving the whole piece a depth of life. Our perspective is a human perspective of the Alaskan range.
This style is what mapmakers or cartographers call Oblique maps.
Giving the viewer a representation of distance or elevation. It so happens to be my favorite style of map. Oblique maps become realistic as if I were standing before the range about to weather it. Inviting me the viewer to put themselves on the map. Oblique maps invite the viewer to explore. The same way incomplete maps used to do for explorers.
Complete maps don’t inspire
Take the Salviati World Map of 1525 as an example. (A copy of which hangs in my bedroom). Made in 1525 at a time when Christopher Columbus had already sailed his ocean blue (1492). Adventurous was starting to map the world out in crude terms. Once published it inspires more people to complete the maps. Go where others had not yet seen or been.
In Yuval Noah Harai’’s great book ‘Sapiens’ which you can read my review of here. An unfinished map asks the viewer. “do you want to explore it?”
For the bold out there, the answer is a resounding “yes.” Have we run out of bold people? I dare say “no.” When acts of bravery happen every single day. In so many different forms even if it seems some are acting in cowardice.
So, do people not get inspired by maps, or are maps not inspiring?
A negative feedback loop leading to our present situation. Is there any hope?
The hope at the moment is as it always has been in the youth. The tools, techniques, and best practices get learned quicker by the more youthful.
The whole community has to move along with it as well. Tom Harrison has made maps for thirty years. According to him the process for making maps changes every six months. A high rate of change but not something that can’t be overcome. Taking time and effort where others might not want to do it.
Youthful change comes with ease of tools.
As TikTok has shown: easy video making tools, means lots of filming. The democratization of these tools has not reached an explosive moment. At present map-making tools usage in fantasy projects. Such as Dungeons and dragons, but I dream of a world where usage is for reality instead.
So, I took it upon myself to use some of these tools. See if I could make a map that is of any good. I will say it is not any good. I had fun making it. Choosing which features of the world around me to make was fun.
I used a website called inkkarnate. A play on the words ink and the word incarnate. I started off using the free version. But after hitting a somewhat uninteresting wall. I reached into my digital wallet and paid five dollars. This advanced my usage ten times.
Allowing me to use the various stamps available. Creating more and more dynamic trees and different color houses. Which inkkarnate made with their graphic design team.
The map did not come out the best as it is not oblique the math of which is quite complicated. Getting perspectives correct. But for the average person who can make a video, edited to be interesting. It’s a wonderful idea to get people involved in making their town come to life using the tools available.
If you want to create one and send it to me I am on Twitter @eagerartisian