Introduction
“…if the map is an instrument of power, then that power is available to whoever wields it. The map is as available as a tool for liberation as much as for exploitation.”
-Alexis Bhagat & Lize Mogel, an atlas of Radical Cartography
Maps are so deeply embedded in our daily lives that questioning their accuracy rarely even occurs. They are inherently abstract, yet sometimes there appears to be a narrow definition of what a map actually is. This is reflected in who gets to define a map, what perspectives are centered, and what perspectives are erased. There’s no question if a drawing of lands and waters divided by tiny lines and embossed with decorative cartouches qualifies as a map, however, the cartographic symbolism embedded in topographic tapestries, invisible lines traced in the sky, etchings in rocks, and braided hairstyles like cornrows are categorized as works of art rather than as forms of mapping. This division is reinforced by academic research, museum exhibits, and even in school curricula, impacting the understanding of how power and perspective influence every map encountered. If a map is data that is organized by spatial relationships, using symbols to help the reader understand, then whether a map that reflects Mercator-esque conformities or features of indigenous populations, “it’s giving” map to me. Every map tells a story, therefore it is of the utmost importance to vigilantly maintain space for students to look beyond the page and peel away the layers that a map (or any content for that matter) conveys.
One story that stood out to me is a story of Power. Power raises questions about who is really in charge here, and how that influences what a map conveys. In examining a variety of maps, I noticed how the evolution of cartography is intertwined with with concepts of conquest, ownership, and racism. One-sided though the story may appear, counterstories exist alongside the dominant ones, some on the same canvas as well as those that arise in response. This unit is not about coloring in lines and dividing up land; it is about widening our definition of what a map can be, consuming with intention and with a critical awareness of purpose and intention, and creating space for students to practice wielding power by sharing their stories. The conception of this unit is guided by the following inquiries: (1) What makes a map, a map? (2) How can maps reflect and respond to society? (3) How can we use maps to express our perspective?
Part One: Maps are a multimodal tool for communication. In this section, students will establish a shared understanding about what defines a map. Students and teacher will co-develop a protocol for interacting with maps. Through close reads and collaborative conversations, students will be prompted to expand their cartographic vocabulary, preparing them to explore both concrete and abstract maps throughout the unit.
Part Two: All maps tell a story and that story is shaped by the perspective of the mapmaker. In this section, students will analyze maps that reflect the narratives of Imperialism, conquest, and land possession.
Part Three: Radical Maps present diverse perspectives that deviate from the dominant narrative found in many of the maps we encounter on a daily basis. In this section, students will explore case studies of (1) a song map detailing a route to escape slavery, “Follow the Drinking Gourd”; (2) an unofficial network of safe performance spaces for Black performers, The Chitlin’ Circuit; (3) three Radical Cartographers (Annie Oliver, Sherman “Dilla” Thomas, and Tonika Lewis Johnson) whose contributions have greatly impacted the cartography of Chicago.
Culminating Project: This will be a culminating project where students become cartographers, empowering them to explore what it means to responsibly construct and shape reality with their voice. Students design a mapping project that expresses their perspective. Students will be encouraged to create with intention, thoughtfully considering how power and perspective impact the world we live in.
Comments: