-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Upside down maps
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 02:12:38 -0500 (EST)
From: David P. Dillard <[log in to unmask]>
------------------
Interested in the issues of northcentric and south oriented maps, I took
the issue to Mr Google and found little use of the term northcentric. I
did however find this customer comment on an online book store website:
Yellowstone National Park Panoramic Hiking Map
by Authors: Trail Tracks
Released: 01 July, 2000
ISBN: 188748907X
Map
Sales Rank: 229,204
List price: $10.95
Our price: $10.95
<http://www.travelreviewbooks.com/
Yellowstone_National_Park_Panoramic_Hiking_Map_188748907X.html>
Customer Comment:
Yellowstone National Park Panoramic Hiking Map > Customer Review #1:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dont waste your money!!!
I would give it negative stars if possible. I purchased this map while
purchasing other books on Yellowstone. I have to say I was quite
disappointed by this map. Its not very detailed and I cant stand trying to
read a map that has South oriented to the top of the map, after all most
books and other info always show North at the top. I highly reccomend the
National Geographic maps, they might cost more but are much better in
quality and will come in handy while hiking."
---------------------------------------------
Apparently this idea of South Oriented Maps was not a big hit with one man
on the street (or in an online bookstore between aisles six and seven).
Sincerely,
David Dillard
Temple University
(215) 204 - 4584
[log in to unmask]
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetGold/>
<http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html>
<http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html>
-------------------------------------------
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Johnnie D. Sutherland wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Upside down maps]]]
> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 13:38:23 -0600
> From: Angie Cope <[log in to unmask]>
> Organization: American Geographical Society Library
> I completely agree that there is no "right side up" to the Earth. The
> whole idea behind putting the words "upside-down" or "turn around" in
> the title of a map is to invite the viewer to consider the map's
> alternate perspective. That is what I'd like to get at by standardizing
> language via a subject heading or note. It seems the consensus is to
> include the note "Map oriented with north to the bottom."
> But, you see don't you, that by relying on this version we're continuing
> to feed into the north-centric, this-way-up mind set. Why don't we say
> "this is a south-oriented map" or "east-oriented map" or whatever. But,
> we have to be careful how many different terms we use because if one
> cataloger says, "Map oriented with south to the top" and another
> cataloger says, "Map oriented with north to the bottom," how the heck
> will our reference librarians find the item in the catalog. (I realize
> that many map catalogers are also the map reference librarians, but still).
> Honestly, I'm not trying to start a riot, but I believe that because
> some of these maps are produced to be unique in this way, we should give
> them credit for such. I understand and appreciate the concept behind
> why other maps are oriented according to the maps purpose (toward a
> peak, or direction of travel), but I think the orientation of an
> upside-down map is a primary focus of the item. No?
> I happen to like subject headings because once they're set, they're set
> (mostly) - but I'm still open to using some kind of note. I'm just
> wondering if there is a good set of words to describe this "invitation
> to consider an unique and alternative perspective of the Earth."
> Angie
> P.S. Thanks all for your input.
> Johnnie D. Sutherland wrote:
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Re: Upside down maps]]
> > Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:17:28 EST
> > From: [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> > ------------------
> > I thought Paige Andrew's suggestion noting 'orientation' was a logical
> > descriptor for maps that are not North-up. Many historical maps are
> > 'direction of
> > travel' oriented, with or without a compass rose to clarify.
> >
> > I'd like to see more cartographers design modern maps that allow the
> > reader
> > to understand a region in a different light by drawing maps in
> > non-north-up
> > direction. I've done a few book maps that way of Hudson Bay and the
> > Chesapeake
> > Bay. Invariably they come under attack by editors because they are
> > different,
> > but if it illustrates a concept well, I feel it is justified.
> >
> > I have done a few modern maps in a non-north-up design, usually to
> > orient
> > with a geographical feature like a peak, valley or river.
> >
> > I agree the 'upside-down' term implies a mistake, or oddity, when
> > really we
> > are a bit trapped by a convention that should be challenged when
> > possible.
> >
> > Mike Hermann
> > www.purplelizard.com
> **************************************************
> Angie Cope, Cartographic Materials Catalog Librarian
> American Geographical Society Library
> UW Milwaukee Libraries
> 2311 E. Hartford
> Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53211
> http://www.uwm.edu/Libraries/AGSL/index.html
> [log in to unmask]
> (414) 229-6282
> (800) 558-8993 (toll free)
> (414) 229-3624 (fax)
> **************************************************
|
