-------- 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) > **************************************************