A discussion and posting space for Rutgers University, Intermediate Landscape Architecture 2 Studio on urban landscapes
Monday, February 1, 2010
Third Reading
Our third reading is James Corner, "The Agency of Mapping: Speculation, Critique and Invention", in Mappings, ed. Denis Cosgrove(London: Reaktion Books, 1999), pp. 231-252.
I found this article really interesting, not only because it made me change my definition of maps, and understand its ability to be more than just a “tracing”. However it really captured my interest because James Corner wrote it and I am researching his Downsview Park design. A lot of what he wrote about I could see reflected in his design. Particularly when he mentioned, “new urban and regional futures must derive less from a utopia of form and more from a utopia of process- how things work, interact and inter-relate in space and time.” This really describes his Downsview design where he didn’t just set up an exact plan that must be followed, instead he designed a “process” that would shape the park.
The reading has opened my mind up to what a map may imply through design as opposed to the accurate mapping of what already exists. In design it is important to simplify what is already given into a format that corresponds to the way the design takes place. The person designing a map has the ability to codify the system that produces the graphical relationships between the collections of data, generalize the resulting representation to eliminate irrelevant data and reduce complexity, and arrange the design of the map for the desired audience. The final step and assessment of this strategy’s success is to assess the hidden and powerful potential that is uncovered and thereby demonstrates new relationships between the mind and the eye. A map does not necessarily have to be word for word, rather it should represent the design in categories in an abstract matter that relates the information to the viewer.
Having spent the entire last semester and this semester so far making and analyzing maps, this article had some interesting things in it. In our inventory for Cape May, we made maps to express and data. In our research for the parks we are studying we have not only come across maps that are used to relay information, but we have come across diagramatic maps that are used to express design and the designer's way of thinking. We have focused our studies on both of these types of maps but the creative maps can have so much more meaning than the maps that are used straight for facts. For, example, the Voices map from the Senior's SBMSW project not only factually showed the boundary of the watershed but also showed the opinions of the residents that live in that area. The Downsview Park designer Rem Koolhaas designed Downsview Park in a series of diagramatic maps that are supposed to represent his vision for the future of the park. He uses dots to express where things are to be placed and expects to watch his "dots" grow over time. I think James Corner ended perfectly when he stated, "Instead of mapping as a means of appropriation, we might begin to see it as a means of emancipation and enablement, liberating phenomena and potential from the encasements of convention and habit."
I like how this article relates to our diagrams and map making in class and how they are more than just simply depicting a site. Although maps are 2 dimensional they are describing a real "active" landscape. I like the quote about space when he says "Arguably, the map always proceeds the territory in that space only becomes territory through acts of bounding and making visible, which are the primary functions of mapping" I never thought of it like that
"Maps are taken to be "true" and "objective measureas of the world..."
Maps are taken for granted when they are only seen for what they represent, rather than what they can do.
See also "geodesign" Geodesign is a design and planning method which tightly couples the creation of design proposals with impact simulations informed by geographic contexts.
I thought this article raised some very interesting ideas. The first idea that really caught my eye was when Corner mentions the tale about the "fully detailed and life-sized map". I instantly thought about how the area around the puddle would look if a huge contour map was draped over top of it. The idea is absurd but I feel as though it would give a new insight into how the landscape around the puddle actually works. The next section I enjoyed was about the use of layers in the design process. Corner talks about Rem Koolhaas and Parc de la Villette and also explains his process in a much simpler way (which I might add was long overdue). He compares the use of layers and their eventual composition to the lines on the floor or court of an athletic arena. The lines and markings on the ground only make sense while playing the game itself. Although the lines are set in the surface, this does not prevent new spontaneous interpretations of the game to form. I feel as though this is exactly what Koolhaas was trying to do with his impossibly hard to understand design for Parc de la Villette. Although his design set up the foundations or infrastructure for the specific programs, his use of combined layers creates an organized yet interwoven array of programs that allows for an infinite number of interpretations.
Although im not sure certain GIS fanatics (cough cough) would admit to it, there is clearly a much deeper understanding that comes with maps and map making. Corner explains how maps are more than just 'utilitarian tools' to be taken for granted as pieces of paper with points and data on them. They are most certainly a medium that not only helps us process geographical relationships, but also help guide and improve our spatial perception...or something like that.
I was thoroughly impressed with Corner's writing. its kind of like a really rich dessert that you can only eat a little bit of at a time or your head might just explode. at least thats how i felt. i also enjoyed how he related the layering in map making to the layering of tracks in music recording. that was a solid 3 or 4 sentences that i fully understood the first time through.
i am also curious as to if anyone else got a chuckle out of joaquin's upside down map on pg 220. was that supposed to be a blind contour? (jk)
I really appreciated a lot about this reading. It was long, but also pretty interesting. There were so many great points that Corner made, including his comparisons between a "map" and a "tracing". At a few points Corner was pretty critical of designers who are so excited and impatient to get to the "actual" design process that they disregard the map making process, or at best go through it out of obligation and are bored out of their mind. I think that there were a couple of times in last years studio when we felt like that. But then Corner made a really good point. He started talking about how "the relationship of maps to world making is surprisingly underthought" and "the power they (maps) possess for construing and constructing worlds". He pointed out (in what to me became a real "duh! I should know this" moment) that designers base their designs off of their maps, and that therefore "mapping is perhaps the most formative and creative act of any design process". He further drives him point how by arguing "given the importance of representational technique in creative process, it is surprising that whilst there has been no shortage of new ideas and theories in design and planning there has been so little advancement and invention of those specific tool and techniques- including mapping- that are so crucial for effective constual and construction of the world."
The idea that Landscape Architects and planners can use mapping agencies to “not only see certain possibilities in the complexity and contradiction of what already exists but to actualize that potential” is very profound. In this world where urban areas are taking over it is vital that we maximize the potential of our landscape and maps provide us with an excellent starting point to do so. Still there are many designers and planners that ignore the use of the mapped information as Corner calls it an “unfortunate consequence” as much of the context is ignored. Corner also writes about how artist often use cartography, this shows how important it is to remember as planners and designers not to forget about the art. He also writes about how important “layering” can be as many different aspects can be “superimposed” to produce better information and stronger strategies for the design.
I liked this reading a lot. I enjoyed the way Corner introduced mapping in a way that really opened my eyes to all of the opportunities mapping has to offer. It was a long read, but i really liked the James Harvey quote on page 228. He speaks of projecting new urban and regional futures as form of process then of one as utopia. He asks for an understaing of the interaction and relationship that objects, people, and places have with space and time when thinking of the future of development.
This reading put a new meaning on maps to me and i found it very interesting how a theorist puts his view on mapping. James corner speaks in a very intellectual vocabulary that makes the article very hard to understand, but it show how clearly he understands the true meaning of what a map is capable of doing
I found this article really interesting, not only because it made me change my definition of maps, and understand its ability to be more than just a “tracing”. However it really captured my interest because James Corner wrote it and I am researching his Downsview Park design. A lot of what he wrote about I could see reflected in his design. Particularly when he mentioned, “new urban and regional futures must derive less from a utopia of form and more from a utopia of process- how things work, interact and inter-relate in space and time.” This really describes his Downsview design where he didn’t just set up an exact plan that must be followed, instead he designed a “process” that would shape the park.
ReplyDeleteThe reading has opened my mind up to what a map may imply through design as opposed to the accurate mapping of what already exists. In design it is important to simplify what is already given into a format that corresponds to the way the design takes place. The person designing a map has the ability to codify the system that produces the graphical relationships between the collections of data, generalize the resulting representation to eliminate irrelevant data and reduce complexity, and arrange the design of the map for the desired audience. The final step and assessment of this strategy’s success is to assess the hidden and powerful potential that is uncovered and thereby demonstrates new relationships between the mind and the eye. A map does not necessarily have to be word for word, rather it should represent the design in categories in an abstract matter that relates the information to the viewer.
ReplyDeleteHaving spent the entire last semester and this semester so far making and analyzing maps, this article had some interesting things in it. In our inventory for Cape May, we made maps to express and data. In our research for the parks we are studying we have not only come across maps that are used to relay information, but we have come across diagramatic maps that are used to express design and the designer's way of thinking. We have focused our studies on both of these types of maps but the creative maps can have so much more meaning than the maps that are used straight for facts. For, example, the Voices map from the Senior's SBMSW project not only factually showed the boundary of the watershed but also showed the opinions of the residents that live in that area. The Downsview Park designer Rem Koolhaas designed Downsview Park in a series of diagramatic maps that are supposed to represent his vision for the future of the park. He uses dots to express where things are to be placed and expects to watch his "dots" grow over time. I think James Corner ended perfectly when he stated, "Instead of mapping as a means of appropriation, we might begin to see it as a means of emancipation and enablement, liberating phenomena and potential from the encasements of convention and habit."
ReplyDeleteI like how this article relates to our diagrams and map making in class and how they are more than just simply depicting a site. Although maps are 2 dimensional they are describing a real "active" landscape. I like the quote about space when he says "Arguably, the map always proceeds the territory in that space only becomes territory through acts of bounding and making visible, which are the primary functions of mapping" I never thought of it like that
ReplyDelete"Maps are taken to be "true" and "objective measureas of the world..."
ReplyDeleteMaps are taken for granted when they are only seen for what they represent, rather than what they can do.
See also "geodesign"
Geodesign is a design and planning method which tightly couples the creation of design proposals with impact simulations informed by geographic contexts.
I thought this article raised some very interesting ideas. The first idea that really caught my eye was when Corner mentions the tale about the "fully detailed and life-sized map". I instantly thought about how the area around the puddle would look if a huge contour map was draped over top of it. The idea is absurd but I feel as though it would give a new insight into how the landscape around the puddle actually works. The next section I enjoyed was about the use of layers in the design process. Corner talks about Rem Koolhaas and Parc de la Villette and also explains his process in a much simpler way (which I might add was long overdue). He compares the use of layers and their eventual composition to the lines on the floor or court of an athletic arena. The lines and markings on the ground only make sense while playing the game itself. Although the lines are set in the surface, this does not prevent new spontaneous interpretations of the game to form. I feel as though this is exactly what Koolhaas was trying to do with his impossibly hard to understand design for Parc de la Villette. Although his design set up the foundations or infrastructure for the specific programs, his use of combined layers creates an organized yet interwoven array of programs that allows for an infinite number of interpretations.
ReplyDeleteAlthough im not sure certain GIS fanatics (cough cough) would admit to it, there is clearly a much deeper understanding that comes with maps and map making. Corner explains how maps are more than just 'utilitarian tools' to be taken for granted as pieces of paper with points and data on them. They are most certainly a medium that not only helps us process geographical relationships, but also help guide and improve our spatial perception...or something like that.
ReplyDeleteI was thoroughly impressed with Corner's writing. its kind of like a really rich dessert that you can only eat a little bit of at a time or your head might just explode. at least thats how i felt. i also enjoyed how he related the layering in map making to the layering of tracks in music recording. that was a solid 3 or 4 sentences that i fully understood the first time through.
i am also curious as to if anyone else got a chuckle out of joaquin's upside down map on pg 220. was that supposed to be a blind contour? (jk)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciated a lot about this reading. It was long, but also pretty interesting. There were so many great points that Corner made, including his comparisons between a "map" and a "tracing". At a few points Corner was pretty critical of designers who are so excited and impatient to get to the "actual" design process that they disregard the map making process, or at best go through it out of obligation and are bored out of their mind. I think that there were a couple of times in last years studio when we felt like that. But then Corner made a really good point. He started talking about how "the relationship of maps to world making is surprisingly underthought" and "the power they (maps) possess for construing and constructing worlds". He pointed out (in what to me became a real "duh! I should know this" moment) that designers base their designs off of their maps, and that therefore "mapping is perhaps the most formative and creative act of any design process". He further drives him point how by arguing "given the importance of representational technique in creative process, it is surprising that whilst there has been no shortage of new ideas and theories in design and planning there has been so little advancement and invention of those specific tool and techniques- including mapping- that are so crucial for effective constual and construction of the world."
ReplyDeleteThe idea that Landscape Architects and planners can use mapping agencies to “not only see certain possibilities in the complexity and contradiction of what already exists but to actualize that potential” is very profound. In this world where urban areas are taking over it is vital that we maximize the potential of our landscape and maps provide us with an excellent starting point to do so. Still there are many designers and planners that ignore the use of the mapped information as Corner calls it an “unfortunate consequence” as much of the context is ignored. Corner also writes about how artist often use cartography, this shows how important it is to remember as planners and designers not to forget about the art. He also writes about how important “layering” can be as many different aspects can be “superimposed” to produce better information and stronger strategies for the design.
ReplyDeleteI liked this reading a lot. I enjoyed the way Corner introduced mapping in a way that really opened my eyes to all of the opportunities mapping has to offer. It was a long read, but i really liked the James Harvey quote on page 228. He speaks of projecting new urban and regional futures as form of process then of one as utopia. He asks for an understaing of the interaction and relationship that objects, people, and places have with space and time when thinking of the future of development.
ReplyDeleteThis reading put a new meaning on maps to me and i found it very interesting how a theorist puts his view on mapping. James corner speaks in a very intellectual vocabulary that makes the article very hard to understand, but it show how clearly he understands the true meaning of what a map is capable of doing
ReplyDelete