You are on page 1of 33

PROOF

Contents
List of Figures

vii

Acknowledgements

Notes on Contributors

xi

1 Mapping Cultures: A Spatial Anthropology


Les Roberts

Part I Place, Text, Topography


2 Critical Literary Cartography: Text, Maps and a
Coleridge Notebook
David Cooper

29

3 Mapping Rohmer: Cinematic Cartography in Post-war Paris


Richard Misek

53

4 Cinematic Cartography: Projecting Place Through Film


Les Roberts

68

5 Walking, Witnessing, Mapping: An Interview with


Iain Sinclair
David Cooper and Les Roberts
6 Maps, Memories and Manchester: The Cartographic
Imagination of the Hidden Networks of the Hydraulic City
Martin Dodge and Chris Perkins

85

101

Part II Performance, Memory, Location


7 Urban Musicscapes: Mapping Music-making in Liverpool
Sara Cohen

123

8 Mapping the Soundscapes of Popular Music Heritage


Paul Long and Jez Collins

144

9 Walking Through Time: Use of Locative Media to Explore


Historical Maps
Chris Speed
10 Salford 7/District Six. The Use of Participatory Mapping
and Material Artefacts in Cultural Memory Projects
Lawrence Cassidy
v

160

181

PROOF
vi Contents

Part III Practice, Apparatus, Cartographics


11 Spatial Stories: Maps and the Marketing of the
Urban Experience
Gary Warnaby

201

12 Mapping My Way: Map-making and Analysis in


Participant Observation
Hazel Andrews

216

13 Mental Maps and Spatial Perceptions: The Fragmentation


of Israel-Palestine
Efrat Ben-Zeev

237

14 Peripatetic Box and Personal Mapping: From Studio to


Classroom to City
Simonetta Moro

260

15 The Anthropology of Cartography


Denis Wood

280

Index

304

PROOF

1
Mapping Cultures: A Spatial
Anthropology
Les Roberts

Reclamations: lost highways, mapping and wayfinding


A short video on YouTube called Google Maps1 provides an entertaining
and gently subversive take on the much-hailed democratization of mapping practices and the Faustian nature of the social contract that delivers
these technologies, so to speak, to our door. At his apartment Jeff is surfing away on his laptop. His flatmate comes into the room and asks him
if he knows where he can buy pictures frames. I dont know but I can
Google Map it, Jeff replies. The flatmate is new to the technology so a
demonstration ensues. Double click and youre at street view, he is
shown. Theres our apartment! Lets go in the courtyard, suggests the
flatmate excitedly. You cant, its a picture from a moving car, Jeff informs
him (unreliably as it turns out). They click and the stairway to their apartment flashes onto the screen. Thats weird They click some more.
The Google Map image is now of the interior of their apartment. Thats
my jacket I just put on the couch! They zoom in further. Several clicks
later and they arrive at an overhead view of themselves hunched over the
laptop. With their backs to the camera (if that is what it is), they stare at
themselves staring at themselves. Cue moody suspense music. Very slowly
they turn around and look up. Now decoupled from virtual space we
no longer see what they see. All of a sudden a red light bathes Jeffs face
and there is an ominous droning sound. Look away, dude!, his flatmate
yells, quickly returning to the laptop: Zoom out, zoom out, zoom out
The location on the screen eventually returns to street view once more.
Stunned and speechless, Jeff sits back at the table. Well , his flatmate
concludes, patting him appreciatively on the back, thanks.
Tapping into fears about surveillance and the Big Brother state,
Google Maps channels a deterritorialized gaze of panoptic power which
1

PROOF
2

Mapping Cultures

Jeff and his newly initiated Google buddy unwittingly stumble upon.
The ultimate geospatial navigation tool a roving webcam which, at
the click of a mouse, and in the instantaneity of the present moment,
can penetrate at will the fourth wall of intimate space the map is
at once both a democratized (yet not necessarily democratizing) portal
to geographical knowledge and a totalizing mechanism of state and
corporate hegemony. The map user, by extension, is an active, indeed
empowered participant in a new and radically reconstituted social
cartography and a passively complicit subject in the virtualization of
everyday social space. For a moment the otherwise mystified hum of the
industrial data farm or the drone of surveillance technologies intrudes
into the more prosaic environs of the digital world.
In the final chapter of this collection of essays on mapping cultures,
Denis Wood notes that as the maps functions multiply, the function that most justifies the pervasiveness of its presence in our lives
seems ever more capable of receding into the background the better
to perform its work unobserved. In the same way that processes of
urban cinematization the reduction of cityscapes to spectacle and
image nurture an urban anthropology of cognitive automatism that is
conducive to consumer capitalism (Roberts 2012), the auto-navigation
functionality of digital locative media can instil a spatial awareness in
which the map and the mapping practice the doing rather than the
application of mapping start to drift apart. As mapping recedes into
the background the (m)app steps in to shoulder the burden, freeing up
our time and space for more productive pursuits (such as shopping).
Stories about cars hurtling off cliffs while their drivers, slavishly following the instructions of the in-car sat-nav, remain oblivious to their
surroundings, have become the stuff of modern legend (and Google
Maps are not exactly known for their unimpeachable accuracy either2).
Inculcating what Margaret Morse (1990) diagnoses as an ontology
of everyday distraction, the spatial mythologies underpinning these
GPS-enabled mapping cultures would be comical had they not, on
a macro-geographical scale, more serious ramifications. The European
Commission has estimated that 67 per cent of the GDP (gross domestic product) of Western nations a800 billion in the European Union
alone is dependent on global navigation satellite systems (GNSS). GPS
(global positioning system), the most widely used GNSS, is now a vital
technological component of data networks, financial systems, shipping
and air transport systems, agriculture, railways and emergency services (Royal Academy of Engineering 2011: 3). In a report published in
March 2011 concerns were expressed about the vulnerability of GNSS to

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 3

threats of systems failure, atmospheric variations or deliberate interference: for example, the jamming of GPS signals or the broadcasting of
false signals (known as spoofing). Warning of worst-case scenarios that
could include the failure of GPS receivers across the world (ibid.: 16),
the reports authors cite as one of the most pressing causes of concern
the lack of adequate back-up resources the foremost being the provision of up-to-date maps (remember them?), not to mention the requisite
navigation skills that render them functional.
It is less the specificities of distinct mapping technologies that are
of relevance here, or the insidious machinations of some shadowy
geospatial technocracy, but rather the agency of maps and of mapping practices: the extent to which mapping represents an open and
inclusive process of disclosure and enablement (Corner 1999: 250). In
the Google Maps video the Orwellian underbelly of geographic information systems (GIS) is gently tickled, but it is Jeffs flatmates insouciant
resumption of his business and his apparent lack of curiosity as to the
dystopian interlude he has just witnessed that for me at least carries
the most resonance. Unlike Jeff, who is shaken to his core, the flatmate
is entirely accepting (or oblivious) of the utopic cartographies that have
been unleashed. Inasmuch as it represents a disembodied gaze (akin,
indeed, to an out of body experience), the spatio-scopic subjectivity
he temporarily inhabits has no-place (utopic in the etymological sense),
or, to put it another way, it is non-indexical.
Google Maps calls to mind the opening scenes of David Lynchs neonoirish thriller Lost Highway (1997). In the film, Fred Madison and his
wife Rene discover a mysterious videotape that has been left on the
doorstep of their house in an unmarked envelope. The video consists of
brief footage of the exterior of their house. No explanation or context
is provided. The following day they receive another tape. This time the
footage extends to a view filmed from inside their house, ending with
a shot of the couple asleep in their bed. A third tape reveals, to Freds
horror, grainy footage of himself, covered in blood, with his wifes
dismembered corpse. I like to remember things my own way, Fred
cryptically lets slip elsewhere in the film. Without wishing to get
embroiled in Lost Highways labyrinthine plot line (to navigate the
film itself demands a form of mapping see Chapters 3 and 4), the
film is ostensibly a study of ontological insecurity and madness (Im
deranged, sings David Bowie over the opening credits). The lost highway of the title is in effect a fugue flight from reality, Freds real self
snapping at the heels of a schizoid persona (Pete) whom he wills into
being. More pointedly, as with Google Maps, the disembodying of the

PROOF
4

Mapping Cultures

gaze from a spatio-temporal locus of being (the positionality of the self


in relation to the world being navigated) creates a disjuncture between
the embodied subject and the topographies of self that are mapped by
the cartographic imaginary. The map imposes its reality on the subject;
agency is exercised by dint of refusal or negation (Jeffs rapid retreat
from the all-seeing vortex of Google Earth; Freds denial of the reality
he is presented with on videotape and from which he is ultimately
forced to flee). Freds journey down his particular lost highway may be
extreme, but this too may be considered a form of mapping insofar as it
cultivates alternative narrative pathways and psycho-topographies (and
psycho-pathologies) of knowledge: mapping as wayfinding as situated
and embodied practices of mobility.
In their book Empire, the Marxist theorists Hardt and Negri argue
that, in an era of multinational capitalism, capital and political sovereignty have become increasingly deterritorialized within virtual,
imperialistic regimes and networks of global power: In [the] smooth
space of Empire, they contend, there is no place of power it is both
everywhere and nowhere. Empire is an ou-topia, or really a non-place
(2000: 190, emphasis in original). If we extend this to the cartographic
imaginary which the example of Google Maps has served to playfully
illustrate, it is precisely those practices and cultures of counter-mapping
which contest or seek to modify hegemonic spatial formations (such
as those endemic to to paraphrase Jameson (1991) the virtual and
spectacular logic of late capitalism) that are of particular import. As a
product of a multiplicity of social and spatial practices, it is less what
the map is that is the burning question (although I accept that to pose
the question is part way to assert or challenge what it could be) than
considerations as to what it does in any given context or milieu, and,
by extension, how different cultures of mapping negotiate, produce,
consume, perform and make sense of what we might tentatively refer
to as cartographic knowledge. Approached from the other direction it
is of course no less a consideration as to the different ways culture and
cultures are themselves mapped, and it is this twofold understanding
of mapping cultures that forms the basis of the discussions that unfold
throughout this book.
As the foregoing discussion has intimated, at a practical as well as a
cultural level a growing convergence between visual culture, mapping
and cartography has blurred the epistemological boundaries that police
understandings of what we might consider to be a map as distinct
from, say, an image. A colleague of mine who had submitted for publication a journal article on the subject of GIS and film historiography

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 5

remarked that the reviewer, picking up on a particular point made


in the article, opined that it was not spatial analysis that was being
advanced but rather visual analysis. This begs the response, Perhaps,
but then it depends on what you mean by spatial analysis (or, for that
matter, visual analysis).
In his article How to Read a Map, the anthropologist Alfred Gell,
commenting on mental map theories of spatial cognition, notes that
[a] multiplicity of partial views [images] does not add up to a map,
which is a perspectiveless, synoptic whole encompassing all locations
and all routes between those locations (1985: 278). Exploring the concordance between a filed image of a landscape (i.e., a cognitive map
gleaned from prior experience of navigating said landscape, whether on
an artefactual map or in actual geographical space) and perceptions of
the landscape in practice (partial views from a single or series of points
in space and time), Gell attempts a synthesis based on the indexical or
non-indexical properties of specific locational media. He asserts that
maps and topographic images are logically distinct and that both are
essential tools of navigation (ibid.: 282). Maps, Gell argues, are compendia of non-token-indexical spatial beliefs. Images are perceptually
based beliefs about what is where in relation to a percipient subject, i.e.
token-indexical spatial beliefs (ibid.: 280).
Picking up these arguments, Tim Ingold points out that, in trying
to disentangle the indexicality of the culture from the non-indexicality of the map (or, to put it another way, to acknowledge the cultural
specificities of local or traditional spatial knowledge while at the same
time ascribing a scientific and value-free cartographic schema) we hit
upon a paradox:
[A]ctual maps are made to appear indexical with regard to cultural
tradition only by a rendering of culture as non-indexical with regard
to locality. The placing of maps within their cultural context is paralleled by the displacing of culture from its context in the lifeworld.
(2000: 226)
For Ingold, the resolution of this paradox lies in the contention that
what maps index is movement: the vision they embody is not local
but regional (ibid., emphasis in original). Yet this regional vision, he
argues, has given way to the totalizing vision of modern cartography
which has scaled up, inexorably, to the level of the global (as though it
issued from a point of view above and beyond the world.) Ill return to
Ingolds instructive reflections on mapping and movement later. For the

PROOF
6

Mapping Cultures

moment I want to ruminate further on the place and aesthetics of the


visual in cultures of mapping in order to consider some of the ways that
the indexical image situated and perspectival framings of topography
and place can function as or indeed be a map, as well as taking stock
of what it in fact does as a map.
Consider the case of Sohei Nishinos Diorama Map London (2010).3 The
question of whether, in conventional cartographic terms, it is in fact a
map seems to crucially miss the point. As an image or rather a collage
assembled from some 4,000 images the map (for that is indeed what
it is) is the result of an intense period of urban gleaning in which, over
the course of a month, Nishino walked the length and breadth of the
city taking thousands of photographic images of its landscapes, streets
and buildings from a wide array of different angles. He then painstakingly cut and re-assembled the images in his studio before reshooting
the completed collage to produce the final image (or map) in photographic form. One of nine Diorama Map projects conducted in cities
across the world, the London map resembles an aerial view of the city,
albeit one assembled from images that represent a mosaic of perspectival mappings culled from the grounded terrain of what de Certeau,
after Merleau-Ponty, terms anthropological space (1984: 117). On the
Michael Hoppen Gallery website the Diorama Maps are described as
lacking the precision of google maps but stamped with the mark of
a wanderer of the city Sohei says of his images: Through the eyes of
an outsider it will be the embodiment of how I remember the city, and
a diary of the streets I walk.4
How, then, does Diorama Map London work as a map? Firstly, it is
iconographic, that is, it features famous landmarks (the London Eye, the
Gherkin, the British Museum, and so on) that help furnish on overall
image of the city in the terms elaborated by Kevin Lynch in his seminal work on cognitive mapping (1960). Secondly, it is ethnographic in
that it frames a cartographic understanding of the city that is cultivated
through embedded social and spatial practices rather than, for example,
as a product of aerial surveys or from virtual navigations and web-based
image gathering conducted via Google Earth or Virtual Earth. Thirdly,
the map is performative insofar as it recodifies the city with the embodied semiotics (Game 1991) and spacings of play, affect and everyday
creativity (Crouch 2010). Fourthly, the Diorama Map is psychogeographic
to the extent that it invites the viewer to explore the (re)imaginative
potential of the city as a malleable or plastic space of urban bricolage;
a dynamic assemblage composed of contrapuntal spatial rhythms
and counter-mappings that take the form of oblique and potentially

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 7

subversive confrontations with everyday landscapes. Fifthly, despite its


static form, the map is, in essence, a map of mobility, the residual artefact of myriad perambulations throughout the metropolis the city, in
other words, as a product of wayfinding, of situated spatial knowledge.
Lastly, for Nishino the map also performs a mnemonic function. As Fred
(or is it Pete?) intones in Lost Highway: I like to remember things my
own way. The image becomes a memory map or portal through which
the artist can re-establish connection with a cartography of time and
place in which the city is revisited as an event or a succession of sitespecific moments.
But it doesnt end there. Considered in its wider social and cultural
context the map could conceivably function in a number of other ways
too. For the gallery or potential purchaser of the art object (or map collector see Perkins 2008: 1556) the map might represent the accrual or
acquisition of cultural capital, a symbolic marker of individual or institutional habitus or of conspicuous consumption (I absolutely must show
you my new Nishino). For city authorities it might perform a totemic
role, the image deployed in tourism and place-marketing discourses as
an expression of a citys cultural vibrancy and identity, or as a symbolic
icon for mass consumption, reproduced on postcards, posters, mugs,
T-shirts, or any one of countless other tourist commodities piled high in
gift shops, museums and galleries. The curator of an exhibition on map
art or of a museum display of images of London (in a local library or
the Museum of London, for instance) would be required to assess how
and in what ways Diorama Map London addresses the overall theme(s)
of the exhibition as well as, accordingly, where it should hang. What
function, in other words, might it perform curatorially? Or, indeed,
pedagogically, if used, for example, in schools or colleges to inspire
students to think about ways, through fieldwork, to engage creatively
with their local landscapes and communities. Alternatively, the map
might also be of value to some of Londons marginalized communities
whose local landmarks and spaces are afforded a level of recognition
that they are routinely denied in official representations of the city
(with the exception of those that round on the crime-ridden character
of specific localities or which spotlight the geographic stigmata of areas
labelled, for example, ASBO hotspots5). Seeing ones local area on the
map an acknowledgement of its rightful place in the wider image
of the city could bolster community spirit or give political voice to
groups contesting the local impacts of development and regeneration
schemes; deprivation, unemployment and economic decline; or processes of urban gentrification.

PROOF
8

Mapping Cultures

On this latter point, in opposition to (or as modifications of) official


cartographies of place and locality (i.e., those expressive of state or
corporate power-elites), the development of community or indigenous
mapping initiatives are nowhere better illustrated than in the work of
Common Ground, whose influential Parish Maps, first established in
the 1980s, has laid the groundwork for a democratized model of vernacular cultural mapping. Organically rooted (or routed) in face-to-face
environments and site-specific aesthetic practices (Coles 2001), Parish
Maps, unlike web-based cultures of mapping, enact a material and
tangible culture of place, landscape and dwelling. As the co-founder of
Common Ground, Sue Clifford points out, it is about taking the place
in your own hands (1996: 4). Despite its long pedigree, Parish Maps
have to date attracted little in the way of scholarly interest (with the
notable exception of Crouch and Matless 1996; Wood 2010: 143556).
What is particularly notable (and exemplary) about these and related
forms of self-initiated local action (Wood 2010: 143) is a concerted
desire to reclaim the map and the practice of mapping from the
cartographers.
In order to get a sense of the culture and values underpinning the
Parish Maps project it is worth citing at length from Cliffords foundational article Places, People and Parish Maps:
Western cartography purports to be factual, conveying a true two
dimensional picture of our four/five dimensional world. But, any
lover of maps will tell you of the peculiarities and richnesses of charts
of different Western cultures, different conventions, endearing or
infuriating mistakes, the challenges of updating, and of necessary
inaccuracies of representation [I]ncreasingly maps are made from
satellite recording, ground knowledge is regarded as less precise, less
useful, more costly With each level of abstraction, we feel less able
to argue what we know, and less sure in our valuing of the unquantifiable smallnesses which can make everyday life a delight and
help nature and culture to interact benignly In making a Parish
Map you can come together to hold the frame where you want it to
be, you can throw light on the things which are important to you,
and you may find courage to speak with passion about why all this
matters. (1996: 57)7
As with Nishinos Diorama Map London, Parish Maps entail a loosening
of cartographic definition (Crouch and Matless 1996: 237) by drawing on and working with a wide range of media, including collage and

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 9

photography, as well as video, textiles, ceramics, paint, drawing and


sculpture. While the paean to community values and localism might
at times paint a picture of a Gemeinschaft view of place-as-dwelling (not
helped, lets face it, by the parish appellation), there is little doubt that
the appeal of Parish Maps lies in their poetic and gently political (Crouch
2010) engagement with everyday social and cultural landscapes and a
unique capacity to tap into and nourish a strong and locally resonant
sense of place (Leslie 2006). Denis Wood draws similar conclusions:
Its hard to say, of course, what with the deafening din of Google
Maps and dashboard-mounted GPS units that gasp! talk to you,
how many will really hear the call sent out by Indigenous mappers,
by Parish Mappers, but its perfectly clear that its they who are pointing to the future, while the electronic wayfinding machinery is doing
nothing more than automating the past. (2010: 154)
Stressing the importance of practice and performativity in everyday productions of place and space, David Crouch reinforces the point that [l]ay
geographies and lay popular cultures emerge in practical ontologies
(2010: 62; see also Crouch 2003). In terms of engaging geographically
with local community-based cartographies, the level of engagement and
interest that is suggested by the Parish Maps example is also attested by
the welter of online, often DIY or open-source mapping resources that,
in their different ways, tap into local spatial knowledge. The remarkable
Geograph Britain and Ireland project, for example, aims to collect
geographically representative photographs and information for every
square kilometre of Great Britain and Ireland (www.geograph.org.uk).
Another resource which provides a clear indicator of a seemingly insatiable hunger for local geographical knowledge is the UK governments
online crime map (www.police.uk), designed to put power in the hands
of the people. Within hours of its launch in February 2011 the website
crashed as the number of hits surged to 18 million an hour with people
up and down the country clambering to enter their postcodes to find
out where and what type of crime was taking place in their neighbourhoods.8 In the wake of the riots that erupted in London and other cities
in England in August 2011 the organization of which is thought to
have been facilitated by the use of social media websites such as Twitter
and Facebook the compilers of the crime map would certainly have
had their work cut out. When the police claimed that online cartographies of crime in the UK would put power in the hands of the people,
this is probably not what they had in mind.

PROOF
10

Mapping Cultures

But while evidence points towards widespread popular engagement in local mapping cultures, there are also cases where increased
spatial knowledge is not welcome or even actively resisted. When in
2010 a local newspaper in Liverpool published a Google Map showing
the route taken by the killers of the toddler James Bulger when they
abducted him in February 1993, reactions posted to the newspapers
website struck a decidedly negative tone. One read: Let the poor lad rest
in peace, nobody wants a map, pity the scum who took his life have to
keep reappearing. Indeed, my attempts to map the route on video in
June 2010 a single uninterrupted take as I walked the length of the
abduction route elicited a hostile reaction from one local resident in
the Walton area who made it abundantly clear that I was not welcome
(for a fuller discussion of this see Roberts 2012: 3740).
Reclaiming the map and the cultures of mapping examples such as
Parish Maps are illustrative of a shift away from (or a more active contestation of) the idea of the map as a disciplinary apparatus of, variously,
the state, the global military-industrial complex, multinational corporations, scientists and technocrats, or any other dominant power-elite we
might wish to hold to account, towards more open and agential forms
of engaged mapping practice. Yet if the pendulum shift in the agency of
mapping has started to swing in more democratized directions (with
the caveat that this term warrants a good deal more critical unpacking than it is typically afforded in discussions of emergent mapping
cultures) then it should also be noted that counter-cultures of mapping or rather mapping cultures that deviate in some way from the
Cartesian model of cartographic rationality are not exactly new or,
indeed, necessarily that emergent. Avant-gardists such as the Dadaists
and Surrealists, for example, or the experiments in psycho-geography
formulated in post-war Paris by the Situationists, exponents of land
art such as Richard Long, the work of many conceptual artists, locative
media art projects such as Tactical Sound Garden or You Are Not Here
(McGarrigle 2010), the many art works (Simon Pattersons The Great
Bear being but one) inspired by Harry Becks iconic map of the London
Underground (itself a radical design in its day),9 not to the mention the
practices and traditions of indigenous mapping cultures, both Western
and non-Western, pre-modern and modern all in their different ways
are testament to the downright refusal of maps and mapping practices
to conform to the strictures of cartographic convention. Nor, it should
be said, do these putative conventions of cartographic orthodoxy themselves constitute a monolithic culture in terms of what it is countermapping cultures are necessarily countering.

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 11

The manifold cultures of mapping are, then, wide ranging and


socially, historically and epistemologically contingent. By corollary,
maps, their visual, textual or artefactual products, have their origins
in distinct yet often overlapping cultures of knowledge production. As
I go on to discuss in the next section, by drawing critical attention to
the processual and multidisciplinary frameworks of mapping practice
and theory (and the spatial ontologies of which they are constitutive)
it is possible to set out a spatial anthropology of mapping cultures and
to re-evaluate the place of maps and mapping in cultural studies and
theory more generally.

Reorientations: interdisciplinary excursions and


blind fields
Tom Conley has suggested that [t]he field of cultural studies is riddled
with the idea of mapping (2009: 131). This is undoubtedly true. Yet
while the trope of mapping has remained a prominent fixture in the
lexicon of recent cultural criticism and debate, what is exactly meant
by the term has at times become rather less clear. A search on Google
Scholar for the social sciences, arts and humanities reveals nearly
40,000 academic texts with the word mapping in the title. Clearly
theres a whole lot of mapping going on. Although this has its problems and frustrations (and Ill touch on some of these shortly), at the
same time the semantic ambiguity that has arguably dogged theoretical
discourses in recent years presents us with challenges that can enliven
and enrich, rather than inhibit, critical understandings of the cultures
of mapping. The writer Iain Sinclair (see Chapter 5) suggests that while
intellectually it seemed to be much in fashion in the 2000s, mapping
has now become more re-energized as a term. He attributes this to a
much broader mix of influences and disciplinary perspectives: [people]
are drawing on forms of memory, language, mapping, anthropology,
and wanting to dissolve the boundaries that have held these to a rigid
scholarly discipline.
If, as I suggested earlier, there has been a growing recognition of the
need to reclaim the map and the practice of mapping from the cartographers, then a case can also be made for the need to reclaim the
analysis of maps and mapping practices from cartographic theory. This
is by no means to suggest that cartography, as a discipline, has wilfully
monopolized the subject area or that scholars from other academic
backgrounds somehow have not pitched in (clearly they have, as the
present collection of essays amply demonstrates). It is merely to draw

PROOF
12

Mapping Cultures

attention to the fact that there is so much more to say about mapping
than is often said in cartographic circles.
At the risk of over-simplification we could, perhaps, map the complementary disciplinary trajectories represented by, on the one hand,
the cultural turn in the spatial disciplines of geography and cartography (Vaiou and Mantouvalou 1999), and, on the other, the so-called
spatial turn in the social and cultural disciplines. While neither of
these reorientations is entirely satisfactory in terms of representing a clear
epistemological shift in direction (and Ill come on to the spatial turn
shortly), what they do hint at is a discursive zone of convergence in
which ideas of maps and mapping are increasingly called upon to act
as rhetorical devices to address sociocultural concerns that are in some
way deemed to be spatial (or vice versa). Cartographic metaphors have
as a result come to displace more literal understandings of what might
constitute mapping in the postmodern socio-spatial imaginary.
From within cartography theoretical work developed in the 1980s by
scholars such as Brian Harley and Denis Wood marked the beginnings
of a shift in thinking towards critical acknowledgement of the socially
constructed and power-laden nature of maps: the new nature of maps,
to cite the title of a posthumous collection of Harleys essays (2001). In
his seminal essay Maps, Knowledge and Power (1988), Harley makes
explicit the need for engagement with other disciplinary perspectives
and a recognition of the deeply historicized, political and cultural contexts within which practices of cartography are framed. In so doing he
challenged positivistic assertions of an abstract and ahistorical cartography founded on Enlightenment principles of reason and scientific
neutrality:
While theoretical insights may be derived, for example, from literary criticism, art history, and sociology, we still have to grapple with
maps as unique systems of signs, whose codes may be at once iconic,
linguistic, numerical, and temporal, and as a spatial form of knowledge Through both their content and their modes of representation, the making and using of maps has been pervaded by ideology.
(Harley 2001: 789)
In Can There Be a Cartographic Ethics?, Harley argues that, to the
extent that it labours under the delusion of scientific objectivity, cartography (and by implication cartographers) cannot make (or rather sustain) ethical claims on behalf of the map (e.g., this is a good map, or a
just map). Cartography, he observes, seems to be uncritical of its own

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 13

practices and both their intentional and unintentional consequences


(2001 [1991]: 198). Claiming to in some way represent the world, cartography remains critically unreflexive of the sociopolitical implications of
maps and mapping practices in terms of what they do in the world.
For Wood, the fallacy of cartographic representation conceals the
essentially propositional character of maps: they are arguments about
existence (2010: 34), and as such bear the imprint of the social, cultural
and political processes of which they are a part. The propositional logic
of maps is therefore premised on the claim of ontological authority, but
it also informs creative processes of ontological genesis insofar as the
map can be said to perform the territory: it brings it into being (ibid.:
51). Playfully deconstructing this propositional logic, in Dodge et al.s
Rethinking Maps collection (2009), Krygier and Wood illustrate (quite
literally, in a comic-book format) the semiology and mythology (in
Barthesian terms) of maps as communication devices. With a nod to
Ren Magrittes painting The Treachery of Images, which shows a pipe
with the words this is not a pipe spelled out underneath, the article,
called Ce nest pas le monde features a map of the world with a voice
bubble emanating from a location somewhere off the coast of Africa
saying this is not the world. A more politically contentious proposition is illustrated with the example of two maps, both of which claim to
represent North India. In the first map Kashmir is part of India, while
in the second it is within the borders of Pakistan. The territory proposed
in the first map is significantly larger than that proposed in the second
(2009: 202; see also Woods chapter in this volume).
The influence of these and other writers whose work falls within
the disciplinary rubric of critical cartography has been far-reaching,
extending beyond the fields of geography and cartography to inform
debates in the social sciences and humanities more generally as scholars
from across disciplinary backgrounds engage with ideas and practices of
mapping.
In Rethinking Maps which, like Denis Cosgroves Mappings (1999)
before it, is a timely collection of essays exploring the shifting meanings and practices of mapping Kitchen, Perkins and Dodge note that
there has been growing recognition of the relational and processual
nature of maps, map-making and map use. Mapping, they suggest, can
be (re)conceptualized as a suite of cultural practices involving action
and affects. This kind of approach reflects a philosophical shift towards
performance and mobility and away from essence and material stability (2009: 17). While this practice turn (if that is what it is) represents
a welcome acknowledgement of the socially and culturally embedded

PROOF
14

Mapping Cultures

nature of mapping, it needs to be stated that this reorientation is understood as such only from the indexical position of the (critical) cartographer. To the anthropologist or ethnographer, that maps are produced
and used through multiple sets of practices (ibid.: 16) would seem selfevident and not especially noteworthy. Indeed, by contrast, grappling
with questions more pertinent to the geographer and cartographer, the
reorientations of the anthropologist would be more likely to take the
form of, inter alia, a spatial or cartographic turn.
In 1986 Wood and Fels argued that [t]he anthropology of cartography is an urgent project (1986: 72). Yet despite this call for a more concerted critical reorientation towards cultures and practices of mapping
and map use, the argument, made in the Cartographic Journal in 2008,
that research into map use has underplayed the significance of wider
contextual concerns associated with the cultures in which mapping
operates and that adopting a cultural approach can allow us to answer
different questions about mapping (Perkins 2008: 150), suggests that
Wood and Felss injunction has largely gone unheeded. As Wood, writing in 2011, confirms (this volume), the anthropology of cartography
is still an urgent project.
If, as recent trends in critical cartography seemingly indicate, there
is a growing recognition of the value of perspectives drawn from social
science and cultural studies disciplines, then how might we negotiate
the theoretical reorientations towards geography and cartography? The
uptake of interest in maps and mapping by scholars in film and literary
studies, art and visual culture, anthropology, cultural studies, marketing, museum studies, architecture, and popular music studies (all of
which are disciplines represented in this book) can perhaps be attributed to the impacts of a more pervasive (and much-trumpeted) spatial
turn (Jameson 1991: 154; Soja 1999: 261) that has left its mark on the
social sciences and humanities.
Reflecting on the theoretical privileging of time over space in discourses of modernity, Foucault suggests that [s]pace was treated as the
dead, the fixed, the undialectical, the immobile. Time, on the contrary,
was richness, fecundity, life, dialectic If one started to talk in terms
of space that meant one was hostile to time (1980: 70). Whether or
not this marked a moment when a critical re-envisioning of the spatial
began to gather momentum, as some have suggested (Soja 1989: 11;
2009: 18), Foucaults oft-cited remarks nevertheless provide a useful
benchmark, underscoring an epistemological shift that, for Soja at least,
marks the incipient rise of a critical spatial imagination (2009: 21) for
which the map has become the defining trope.

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 15

A brief survey of recent publications and scholarly activity focused


around discussions of the spatial turn reveals the extent to which this
has developed into something of a dominant paradigm. Edited collections such as The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Warf and
Arias 2009), The Spatial Turn: Paradigms of Space in the Cultural and Social
Sciences (Dring and Thielmann 2008) and Geographies of Communication:
The Spatial Turn in Media Studies (Falkheimer and Jansson 2006) vie with
a host of articles which critically map the spatial turn in, for example,
social science history (Knowles 2000), social theory (Pickles 1999), contemporary social movements (Cobarrubias and Pickles 2009), the history
of science (Finnegan 2008), art history (Highmore 1998), film studies
(Roberts 2005, 2012; Koeck and Roberts 2010), literature (Kerrigan 1998;
Cooper 2008), Jewish studies (Fonrobert 2009), even geography (Withers
2009); as well as a number of conferences and symposia, including the
Spatial Turn in History symposium at the German Historical Institute
in 2004 and Cosmopolitan Cities: from Cultural Turn to Spatial Turn,
a panel at the Association of Social Anthropologists conference at the
University of Keele in 2006. There is also a dedicated spatial turn website (www.spatialturn.de).
In addition to the examples outlined above, it is also worth remarking on the widespread tendency to attach the navigational descriptor
turn to almost any field of academic specialization: computational
turn, cultural turn, historical turn, critical turn (a recent development in, for example, tourism studies which, rather disingenuously,
ignores the fact that there have always been critical perspectives that
scholars have brought to bear on the subject), ethnographic turn,
performance turn, mobility turn, pictorial turn, and so on: all are
examples of recent turns which are shaping academic discourse. It lies
beyond the remit of this introduction to speculate as to the reasons for
this turn turn, but needless to say, with all this turning going on it is
hardly surprising if on occasion some degree of critical disorientation
sets in.
Turning back to the spatial turn for a moment, Cosgrove attributes it
to post-structuralist agnosticism born of the recognition that position
and context the discursive locatedness of epistemic enunciation are,
as Warf and Arias note, implicated in all constructions of knowledge
(2009: 1). Soja, in turn, remarks that the spatial turn has been closely
bound up with debates in critical cultural studies and postcolonial theory (2009: 25). Stressing the importance of fostering spatial justice, Soja
goes on to suggest that this may in the end be the best way to promote
and expand the Spatial Turn today and in the future (ibid.: 32).

PROOF
16

Mapping Cultures

Although Soja and others have, quite rightly, acknowledged the


hugely influential role played by Henri Lefebvre in steering theory and
critique in more spatial directions, as a major luminary in the canon of
critical spatial theory Lefebvres work has arguably been slow to make
inroads into many areas of cultural studies and theory and, as such, has
not had as full an impact as it undoubtedly warrants. While there is
not the scope to discuss this in any depth here,9 what I wish to briefly
explore in relation to interdisciplinary frameworks of theory and debate
surrounding the critical spatial turn is Lefebvres concept of blind
fields, which he outlines in his book The Urban Revolution, published in
1970, four years before the publication of his groundbreaking work The
Production of Space (1991 [1974]).
By way of introduction to this concept, on an anecdotal level, coming from a background in social anthropology, one of the things that
struck me as interesting while working as a postdoctoral researcher in
the School of Architecture at the University of Liverpool was the extent
to which there appeared to be little, if any intellectual dialogue between
the architects and academic colleagues in other spatial disciplines,
namely civic design and geography, both only a few minutes walk
across campus. The publication in 2011 of The Sociology of Architecture
by Paul Jones, a lecturer in the School of Sociology and Social Policy at
Liverpool, rendered even more transparent the apparent disciplinary
gulf the blind fields between departments by seeking to illuminate
the broader social production of architecture and the underlying
power relations inherent in the cultural strategies employed by states
and other political [and, I would add, disciplinary] regimes (2011:
56).
For Lefebvre, blind fields are critically bound up with the problem of
the urban:
Blindness consists in the fact that we cannot see the shape of the
urban, the vectors and tensions inherent in this field, its logic
and dialectical movement There are blind fields whenever
language fails us, whenever there is a surfeit or redundancy in a
metalanguage The blinding is the luminous source (knowledge
or ideology) that projects a beam of light, that illuminates elsewhere.
(2003: 40, 31, emphasis in original)
At an institutional level the (empty) rhetoric of interdisciplinarity echoes with stultifying regularity through the corridors of the academy, yet
rarely is it embraced more radically as a self-reflexive denaturalization

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 17

of knowledge, in which an awareness of the intellectual and institutional constraints and blind spots of knowledge production is cultivated
and positively reinforced (Moran 2002: 187). Blind fields, then, reside in
the gaps between disciplines and institutionalized fields of knowledge
(Shields n.d.11). By corollary, in terms of spatiality the project of critical
interdisciplinarity becomes a process of mapping the blind fields: an
interrogation of spatial ideologies (Smith 2003: xiii) that takes the form
of a dialectical counterpoint to dominant spatialities of knowledge. In
this sense mapping may be understood as a spatial praxis. Suffice to say
it is not sufficient to merely attribute this to a wider spatial turn (geography as an explanatory factor) but rather to problematize and contest
the abstract rhetoric of space that has increasingly come to define what
might actually be meant by the spatial turn.
To the extent that these interdisciplinary navigations are predicated
on the negation of transcendent cartographies of knowledge, the spatial praxis of mapping, as elaborated here, is ontologically grounded
in movement and mobility. Accordingly, it is to Ingolds wayfinding
(2000: 21942) or wayfaring (2007: 72103) that our interdisciplinary
excursions lead us once more. Drawing a distinction between mapping
(wayfinding/wayfaring) and cartography (map-making), for Ingold,
knowledge is cultivated by moving along paths that lead around,
towards or away from places; it is ambulatory we know as we go, not
before we go (2000: 229, 230, emphasis in original). Neither placeless
nor place-bound but place-making (Ingold 2007: 101, emphasis in original), wayfaring, like writing, is a fundamentally creative act. Viewed in
this way, the world of everyday praxis is constituted and reconstituted
by the mappings conferred upon it by movements and itineraries, not by
cartographic representations (maps) by which it is otherwise bound in
time and space, and from which geographical knowledges are otherwise
framed. As Ingold points out, all wayfinding is mapping, though not all
mapping is wayfinding (2000: 232). Unlike maps, cultures of mapping
mobilize, temporalize and above all humanize space.

Recultivations: mapping place, practice, performance


The essays in Mapping Cultures are loosely grouped in three main sections: (1) Place, Text, Topography; (2) Performance, Memory, Location;
(3) Practice, Apparatus, Cartographics. These are not intended as fixed
thematic categories and there is a considerable degree of overlap across
sections and across chapters. All in their different way touch on questions of place, practice and performance. The rationale for structuring

PROOF
18

Mapping Cultures

the volume in this way is to cluster together contributions which,


firstly, engage with textualities of space, place and mapping and the
cultural topographics of literary, cinematic and urban forms of spatial
practice. Secondly, the volume draws together a selection of essays
that address aspects of performance and cultural memory as mapped
across four UK cities: Liverpool, Birmingham, Edinburgh and Salford
in Greater Manchester. The third section includes contributions which
variously explore the practical, instrumental and performative role of
maps, whether as methodological tools in ethnographic and qualitative
research, apparatuses for marketing and communication, or as sitespecific agents for psycho-geographic or pedagogical forms of urban
spatial engagement.
David Coopers chapter continues some of the threads of discussion
outlined above in relation to the metaphorization of space and mapping
in postmodern cultural discourse. Arguing that Genuinely interdisciplinary geohumanities research needs to be predicated upon a selfreflexive engagement with geographical thinking and practices rather
than an uncritically imprecise reliance on spatial vocabularies and
discourses, Cooper goes on to explore the scope for a critical literary
cartography, basing his analysis on the notebooks and maps of the
Romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Richard Misek explores the
cinematic geographies of Eric Rohmers Paris as mapped across more
than 20 films the director shot in the city between the 1950s and 2000s.
He demonstrates the ways in which Rohmers films can themselves
together be regarded as constituents of a composite map of Paris, connecting hundreds of locations across the city. Miseks journey through
the psycho-geography of Rohmers Paris also maps the possibilities of
cinematic cartography as a mode of urban spatio-temporal navigation.
Picking up this theme, in Chapter 4 I outline a five-point typology by
which to examine some of the recent contributions in the wider field
of cinematic cartography. Presented as a field guide to research on
film, maps and mapping, the chapter explores the different ways film
cultures and practices might be understood as geographical productions of knowledge. Chapter 5 takes the form of an interview with Iain
Sinclair in which the writer, poet and film-maker is invited to reflect
on the importance of maps and mapping in his work. With particular
emphasis on the doing of literary psycho-geography and deep topography, the discussion takes in the solitary mappings of walkers, flneurs
and wanderers ranging from Coleridge and Thomas de Quincey to
David Rodinsky and Nick Papadimitriou, as well as examples of some of
Sinclairs literary mappings in books such as Lud Heat, Dark Lanthorns,

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 19

Edge of the Orison, and Ghost Milk: Calling Time on the Grand Project. In
the final chapter of Part I, Martin Dodge and Chris Perkins descend
into the hidden hydraulic infrastructures of Victorian and Edwardian
Manchester. They argue that maps, plans and diagrams of the hydraulic
city are themselves hidden and open to multiple and shifting interpretations. As virtual witnesses to the unseen city, spatial representations of
these underground networks provide insights into the changing political and cultural significance of water and the narratives and memories
that are constructed by urban practices of hydraulic mapping.
In her discussion of Liverpools popular musicscapes, Sara Cohen
explores the role of maps and map-making practices as methodological
and analytical tools of ethnographic research into music, culture and
place. Avoiding fixed and narrow definitions of maps and mapping,
Cohen illustrates the different ways map-making informed the research
process. The creation of digital GIS maps as part of an exhibition on
Liverpools popular music history and the elicitation of hand-drawn
maps by musicians to explore memories and geographies of specific
performance circuits provides insights into the ways musicians engage
with material urban environments and how musicscapes characterize the city. Paul Long and Jez Collins chart similar terrain in their
chapter, which draws on sites and cartographies of popular music
heritage in Birmingham to explore issues around spatial historiography and collective memory. Basing their analysis on maps produced
as part of initiatives linked to the development of the Birmingham
Popular Music Archive an online resource charting the history and
heritage of popular music in the city Long and Collins relate their
discussion to wider debates on the role of popular music in discourses
of tourism, heritage and post-industrial urban regeneration. Taking a
more technological approach, Chris Speeds chapter demonstrates an
altogether different way of navigating and performing a citys spaces
of memory. Walking Through Time is a GPS-enabled mobile application that enables smartphone users to navigate their way through an
urban landscape using historical maps. Mapping the embodied spaces
of disruption between past and present geographies, augmented reality
and locative media technologies, Speed argues, provides a means to
track changes in the built environment of cities in new and innovative
ways. Bringing Part II to a close, Lawrence Cassidys chapter draws on
the example of the District Six Museum in Cape Town, and the destruction of the local communities and landscapes that gave rise to it, to
provoke comparisons with Salford 7 in Greater Manchester, an area that
has also witnessed the large-scale demolition of neighbourhoods and

PROOF
20

Mapping Cultures

communities in the name of regeneration. Examining the contested


politics of place-making in District Six and Salford 7, Cassidy assesses
the role of participatory mapping practices and memory workshops in
the reconstruction and reclamation of urban memoryscapes.
In Part III, Practice, Apparatus, Cartographics, Gary Warnaby looks
at the use of maps in the marketing of towns and cities. He suggests
that cartography is used, on the one hand, at an inter-urban level to
emphasize a town/citys location in relation to other places; and, on the
other, at an intra-urban level to facilitate navigation around a particular
locale. Warnaby argues that place marketers need to exploit advances
in the democratization of mapping so as to more adequately represent
and promote the experiential dynamics and diversity of urban places
to actual and potential consumers. Hazel Andrewss chapter focuses on
the spatial practice of anthropological fieldwork by examining mapmaking as a data collection method. Drawing on radical empiricist and
phenomenological methods Andrews explores the ways in which mapmaking not only informed her understanding of the spatial geography
of the fieldwork setting the Mallorcan tourist resorts of Magaluf and
Palmanova but also enabled her to situate herself, as a researcher, in
the field. She argues that, in the post-fieldwork stage, the conversion of
rough field sketches into more clearly defined maps helped inform the
process of data interpretation and critical reflexion. Efrat Ben-Zeev also
explores map-making methods from an anthropological perspective.
Using mental or cognitive mapping methods to explore how Israeli
students, both Jewish and Arab-Palestinian, perceive and represent their
geographical surroundings, Ben-Zeev asked 190 students to each draw
a map of the country and of the Middle East. Her findings revealed
a general lack of spatial awareness and a disjuncture between people
and their surroundings. Results varied from student to student, but the
picture of the country that emerged is likened to a puzzle with many
missing pieces, made up of geographical bubbles and black holes. The
artist Simonetta Moro describes examples of her art work and practice in
which she uses mapping to explore alternative ways to experience and
explore urban environments. Introducing the Peripatetic Box a portable device that contains a series of questions and triggers for the user
to create his or her guide through the city Moro illustrates the ways in
which mapping functions as a psycho-geographic tool. In addition, her
Personal Mapping in New York project explores the use of mapping as
a pedagogical form of urban engagement, while the Panoramic Project
proposes a notion of mapping as narrative record of time and place. In
the final chapter, parts of which I have cited in previous sections of this

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 21

essay, Denis Wood argues the case for an anthropology of cartography,


noting that we still have little idea what the gazillion maps are used
for. Exploring the mythic, propositional and performative function of
maps, he suggests that what the map in fact does seems less clear and
more diffuse than ever. While the power of the map has us all performing the great map ritual of the state, Wood holds out for the possibility
of undoing this hegemony and of reclaiming the map as something truly
human.

Postscript: how I learnt to stop worrying and love the map


Google Mobile12 is the last in The Googling series of films that began
with Google Maps. A group of friends are leaving a cinema where they
have been watching the action film Iron Man. One of them asks, Do
you know where you can get ice cream around here? I can Google
Map Mobile it? suggests another. Cut to a close-up of the mobile
phone screen as they search for a nearby ice cream parlour. There you
go: Hollywood Gelato. The phone user then shows the others how
to follow directions to the destination on the map. Thats where we
are Thats Gelato. Follow that line Boomtown! A moment later
something odd starts to happen. The location marker for Gelato begins
to move down the line on the map towards their current location. How
can an ice cream shop get closer? Cue moody suspense music. The shop
is now just round the corner. Run! RUN!, one of the friends shouts.
They run. A chase ensues although we do not see their stalker. After a
while they stop and check the whereabouts of the shop. The marker
indicates it is only feet away. They look up. Standing before them is a
life-size materialization of the yellow Google Street View Man. What
do you want from us? they demand. No response. Street View Man is
now standing face to face with one of the group in what seems like a
showdown. The oversized stickman slowly reaches for something from
behind his back. Is it a weapon? When he raises his arm it becomes
clear that what he is fact offering the Google Map Mobile user is an ice
cream. After all that, he just wanted to be friends, to do them a good
turn (although in the final frames of the film the ice cream is delivered
to the mans face).
Perhaps cartophobic anxieties concerning the coercive or disciplinary power of maps have been similarly misplaced. In an age when
the democratization of cartography has transformed the way maps are
produced and consumed, it is not so much the instrumental performativity of maps that is the issue but rather the extent to which cultures of

PROOF
22

Mapping Cultures

mapping can enhance the democratization and cultures of our everyday


lives and social spaces.

Notes
1. The video was made by the Los Angeles-based comedy film group The
Vacationeers. See www.youtube.com/thevacationeers#p/a/8C9E6213AEFC9E0B/
0/fPgV6-gnQaE (accessed 9 January 2012).
2. Drawing an analogy between desktop mapping tools such as Google Maps and
the fast-food industry, Dodge and Perkins note that Mc-Maps, made with
easy-to-use technology, are also cheap to produce, and seductive at first glance,
but can also leave a nasty taste in the mouth. Often, too, they lack lasting impact,
have supplanted better alternatives, and are low quality (2008: 1273).
3. A detail of Diorama Map London is reproduced on the cover of this book.
4. www.michaelhoppengallery.com/artist,show,3,161,238,1491,0,0,0,0,michael_
hoppen_gallery.html (accessed 9 January 2012). See also www.soheinishino.
com/en/works/index.html#dioramamap (accessed 9 January 2012).
5. Introduced by Tony Blairs government in 1998, Anti-Social Behaviour
Orders (ASBOs) are civil orders designed to prevent antisocial behaviour
including theft, intimidation, drunkenness and violence. The orders often
include restrictions on entering a geographical area or shop but can include
bans on specific acts, such as swearing in public. See http://news.bbc.
co.uk/1/hi/uk/1883277.stm (accessed 9 January 2012).
6. See also the collection of short essays compiled in Common Grounds own
publication on Parish Maps (Clifford and King 1996), which includes contributions from David Crouch and Barbara Bender.
7. Cliffords article can also be accessed via Common Grounds website: www.
england-in-particular.info/cg/parishmaps/m-index.html (accessed 9 January
2012).
8. See www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/01/online-crime-maps-power-handspeople (accessed 10 January 2012).
9. For a selection of alternative London Tube maps see: http://acrosstheuniverse.
forummotion.com/t700-alternative-london-tube-maps (accessed 10 January
2012).
10. For a selection of recent cultural studies texts that have drawn productively
on Lefebvres work, see Dimendberg (2004), Highmore (2005), Moran
(2005), Wells (2007) and Roberts (2012).
11. A revised version of the paper appears in Soziale Welt 16: Die Wirklichkeit der
Stdte (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesselschaft, 2005).
12. See www.youtube.com/thevacationeers#p/c/8C9E6213AEFC9E0B/4/wwa
WFS7rU-g (accessed 11 January 2011).

References
Clifford, S. (1996). Places, People and Parish Maps. In S. Clifford and
A. King (eds), From Place to Place: Maps and Parish Maps. London: Common
Ground.

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 23
Clifford, S. and King, A. (eds) (1996). From Place to Place: Maps and Parish Maps.
London: Common Ground.
Cobarrubias, S. and Pickles, J. (2009). Spacing Movements: the Turn to
Cartographies and Mapping Practices in Contemporary Social Movements.
In B. Warf and S. Arias (eds), The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives.
London: Routledge.
Coles, A. (ed.) (2001). Site-Specificity: The Ethnographic Turn. London: Black Dog.
Conley, T. (2009). The 39 Steps and the Mental Map of Classical Cinema. In
M. Dodge, R. Kitchen and C. Perkins (eds), Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in
Cartographic Theory. London: Routledge.
Cooper, D. (2008). The Poetics of Place and Space: Wordsworth, Norman
Nicholson and the Lake District. Literature Compass 5: 80721.
Corner, J. (1999). The Agency of Mapping: Speculation, Critique and Invention.
In D. Cosgrove (ed.), Mappings. London: Reaktion Books.
Cosgrove, D. (ed.) (1999). Mappings. London: Reaktion Books.
Crouch, D. (2003). Spacing, Performing, and Becoming: Tangles in the
Mundane. Environment and Planning A 35 (11): 194560.
Crouch, D. (2010). Flirting with Space: Journeys and Creativity. Farnham: Ashgate.
Crouch, D. and Matless, D. (1996). Refiguring Geography: Parish Maps of
Common Ground. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers n.s. 21 (1):
23655.
de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. London: University of
California Press.
Dimendberg, E. (2004). Film Noir and the Spaces of Modernity. London: Harvard
University Press.
Dodge, M. and Perkins, C. (2008). Reclaiming the Map: British Geography
and Ambivalent Cartographic Practice. Environment and Planning A 40 (6):
12716.
Dodge, M., Kitchen, R. and Perkins, C. (eds) (2009). Rethinking Maps: New
Frontiers in Cartographic Theory. London: Routledge.
Dring, J. and Thielmann, T. (eds) (2008). The Spatial Turn: Paradigms of Space in
the Cultural and Social Sciences. Bielefeld: Transcript.
Falkheimer, J. and Jansson, A. (eds) (2006). Geographies of Communication:
The Spatial Turn in Media Studies. Gteborg: Nordicom.
Finnegan, D. A. (2008). The Spatial Turn: Geographical Approaches in the
History of Science. Journal of the History of Biology 41 (2): 36988.
Fonrobert, C. E. (2009). The New Spatial Turn in Jewish Studies. Association
of Jewish Studies 33 (1): 15564.
Foucault, M. (1980). Questions on Geography. In C. Gordon (ed.), Power/
Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 19721977. Brighton: Harvester
Press.
Game, A. (1991). Undoing the Social: Towards a Deconstructive Sociology.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Gell, A. (1985). How to Read a Map: Remarks on the Practical Logic of
Navigation. Man n..s. 20 (2): 27186.
Hardt, M. and Negri, A. (2000). Empire. London: Harvard University Press.
Harley, J. B. (1988). Maps, Knowledge and Power. In D. Cosgrove and S. Daniels
(eds), The Iconography of Landscape: Essays in the Symbolic Representation, Design
and Use of Past Environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

PROOF
24

Mapping Cultures

Harley, J. B. (2001). The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography,
ed. P. Laxton. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Highmore, B. (1998). Turning Spatial. Art History 21 (2): 2848.
Highmore, B. (2005). Cityscapes: Cultural Readings in the Material and Symbolic
City. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood: Dwelling
and Skill. London: Routledge.
Ingold, T. (2007). Lines: A Brief History. London: Routledge.
Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.
London: Verso.
Jones, P. (2011). The Sociology of Architecture. Liverpool: Liverpool University
Press.
Kerrigan, J. (1998). The Country of the Mind. Times Literary Supplement
11 September, pp. 34.
Kitchen, R., Perkins, C. and Dodge, M. (2009). Thinking about Maps. In
M. Dodge, R. Kitchen and C. Perkins (eds), Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in
Cartographic Theory. London: Routledge.
Knowles, A. K. (ed.) (2000). Special Edition, Historical GIS: The Spatial Turn in
Social Science History. Social Science History 24 (3).
Koeck, R. and Roberts, L. (2010). Introduction: Projecting the Urban. In
R. Koeck and L. Roberts (eds), The City and the Moving Image: Urban Projections.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Krygier, J. and Wood, D. (2009). Ce Nest Pas Le Monde (This is Not the World).
In M. Dodge, R. Kitchen and C. Perkins (eds), Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in
Cartographic Theory. London: Routledge.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lefebvre, H. (2003). The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Leslie, K. (2006). A Sense of Place: West Sussex Parish Maps. Chichester: West
Sussex County Council.
Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McGarrigle, C. (2010). The Construction of Locative Situations: Locative Media
and the Situationist International, Recuperation or Redux? Digital Creativity
21 (1): 5562.
Moran, J. (2002). Interdisciplinarity. London: Routledge.
Moran, J. (2005). Reading the Everyday. London: Routledge.
Morse, M. (1990). An Ontology of Everyday Distraction. In P Mellencamp
(ed.), Logics of Television: Essays in Cultural Criticism. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Perkins, C. (2008). Cultures of Map Use. The Cartographic Journal 45 (2): 1508.
Pickles, J. (1999). Social and Cultural Cartographies and the Spatial Turn in
Social Theory. Journal of Historical Geography 25 (1): 938.
Roberts, L. (2005). Non-Places in the Mist: Mapping the Spatial Turn in Theo
Angelopoulos Peripatetic Modernism. In W. Everett and A. Goodbody (eds),
Revisiting Space: Space and Place in European Cinema. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Roberts, L. (2012). Film, Mobility and Urban Space: A Cinematic Geography of
Liverpool. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Royal Academy of Engineering (2011). Global Navigation Space Systems: Reliance
and Vulnerabilities. London.

PROOF
A Spatial Anthropology 25
Shields, R. (n.d.). The Virtuality of Urban Culture: Blanks, Dark Moments and Blind
Fields. At: www.facom.ufba.br/ciberpesquisa/andrelemos/virtuality.rtf (accessed
23 January 2012).
Smith, N. (2003). Foreword. In H. Lefebvre, The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social
Theory. London: Verso.
Soja, E. W. (1999). Thirdspace: Expanding the Scope of The Geographical
Imagination. In D. Massey, J. Allen and P. Sarreet (eds), Human Geography
Today. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Soja, E. W. (2009). Taking Space Personally. In B. Warf and S. Arias (eds),
The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London: Routledge.
Vaiou, D. and Mantouvalou,M. (eds) (1999). Special Issue: Spatial Disciplines in
the Cultural Turn. European Planning Studies 7 (1).
Warf, B. and Arias, S. (eds). (2009). Introduction: the Reinsertion of Space into
the Social Sciences and Humanities. In B. Warf and S. Arias (eds), The Spatial
Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London: Routledge.
Warf, B. and Arias, S. (eds) (2009). The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives.
London: Routledge.
Wells, K. (2007). The Material and Visual Cultures of Cities. Space and Culture
10 (2): 13644.
Withers, W. J. (2009). Place and the Spatial Turn in Geography and in History.
Journal of the History of Ideas 70 (4): 63758.
Wood, D. (2010). Rethinking the Power of Maps. New York: Guilford Press.
Wood, D. and Fels, J. (1986). Designs on Signs/Myth and Meaning in Maps.
Cartographica 23 (3): 54103.

PROOF
Index
Ackroyd, Peter 87
African National Congress 182, 186,
189
agency 34, 10, 48, 141, 208,
300
Allen, Robert C. 723, 81
Anderson, Benedict 298
Appadurai, Arjun 133, 141
Arab-Palestinian 20, 243, 248,
2501, 253, 258
archaeology 91, 139, 186
Anti Social Behavioural Orders 7
Ashworth, Gregory 205
Atkins, Marc 99, 267
Aug, Marc 66, 138
augmented reality 19, 165, 178
Austin, John L. 2935
Aviators Wife, The (1981) 55, 58, 60,
66, 67
bacteriological city 1034
Baigent, Elizabeth 2978
Baker, Brian 88
Bar-Ilan University, Israel 241
Barthes, Roland 13, 2768, 281
Bass, David 56
Bayreuth 146
Beat Goes On, The, exhibition,
Liverpool 1256, 148, 158
Beatles, The 126, 135, 142, 159
Beck, Harry 10, 44, 5960
Beckett, Samuel 96, 99
Beijing Olympics 167
Beit Berl College, Israel 241
Benjamin, Walter 68, 77, 261, 263,
269
Benvenisti, Meron 2502
Berman, Marshall 57
Berry, Mary Elizabeth 299, 3012
Bertin, Jacques 204
Bhangra 144, 150
Bicknell, Peter 35
biopolitics 102

Birmingham Popular Music


Archive 19, 1445, 14851, 1534,
1568
Bjerknes, Vilhelm 291
black holes 251, 254, 256
Blake, William 34, 88
blind fields 11, 1617, 80
blind patches 248
Boas, Franz 217
Bohlin, Anna 188
Bounds, Jon 1535, 1578
Bourdieu, Pierre 217, 224, 226
Boutet, Aria 2668
bricolage 6
British Library 33, 155
Brooklyn 267, 2702, 275, 292
Brown, Roy Chubby 226, 234
Brumbeat 153
Bruno, Giuliana 689, 767, 81, 266
bubbles 13, 20, 24350, 252, 256
Bulger, James 10
Caquard, Sebastian 70, 73
Cardiff, Janet 91
Carew, Keggie 97
Carlson, Julia S. 35
cartefacts 2901
Cartesian 10, 164
Castro, Teresa 53, 65, 778
Catling, Brian 99
Cavern Club, Liverpool 126, 147
Certeau, Michel de 6, 53, 1612,
164, 201, 2078, 210
Chambard, Jean-Luc 218, 233
Charlotte et Vronique, ou Tous les
garcons sappellent Patrick (1959) 64
cinematic cartography 18, 65, 6881
cinematic maps 53, 70
cinematization 2, 80
cinematographic tourism 70, 73
City of Manchester Corporation 111
City of Raleigh map 287
Clare, John 956, 100
304

PROOF
Index 305
Claybury Asylum 97, 99
Clifford, James 219
Clifford, Sue 8, 22
Coburn, Kathleen 32, 37, 414,
4950
cognitive mapping 56, 20, 30, 70,
768, 128, 2067, 237, 239 see also
mental mapping
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor 18, 29,
3250, 88, 97
Common Ground 8, 22
Conklin, Harold 21718, 233
Conley, Tom 11, 701, 767, 301
Connell, John 141, 145, 147
Coombes, Annie 186, 1901
Corbin, Alain 146
Cosgrove, Denis 13, 15, 33, 41, 71,
202
Crick, Malcolm 218, 224
Crouch, David 6, 9, 22, 80
Cuddy-Keane, Melba 30
Cumberland 35, 37, 39, 40, 424,
46, 48
cyberspace 164
Dada 10
Dagenham 97
Daniels, Stephen 29
Dark Lanthorns 18, 96, 99
Davies, Ray 150
Davies, Wyn 223
de Quincey, Thomas 18, 889
Debord, Guy 63, 238, 264
deep mapping 92, 139
deep topography 18, 92, 96
Del Casino Jr., Vincent J. 72, 117,
218
Deleuze, Gilles 701, 118
democratization 1, 10, 202, 205,
209, 21112
Derrida, Jacques 278
Diorama Map London 68
District Six, Cape Town 1920,
1813, 18592, 195
Downriver 97
drainage 103, 105, 108, 112
Edge of the Orison
edgelands 92

19, 95

Edinburgh 18, 89, 1601, 16770,


1748
Eiffel Tower 274
England Rocks online music
map 149
English Heritage 123
ethnography 6, 1415, 1819, 789,
1236, 128, 132, 136, 1389,
21620, 223, 2256, 233
European Capital of Culture 123,
125
Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 2245
Facebook 9, 132, 153
Fellinis Roma (1972) 268
Fels, John 14, 2801, 286, 28990,
293, 296
fieldwork 7, 20, 33, 21618, 220,
2236, 230, 233
film as spatial critique 78
Finnegan, Ruth 136
Finnegans Wake 96
First World War 184, 290
flnerie 57
flneur 68, 153, 264
Flickr 153
Florida, Richard 147, 212
flows 102, 1045, 108, 141
Fosters and Partners, Architects
170
Foucault, Michel 14, 102, 115, 257
From Soho Road to the Punjab
website 144
Full Moon in Paris (1984) 60, 62
Gaza Strip 241, 2513, 256
Gell, Alfred 5, 224
gentrification 7, 268, 270
geo-body 2978
geocriticism 313, 424, 489
Geograph Britain and Ireland 9
geographic information systems
34, 19, 458, 723, 79, 81, 90,
11516, 1245, 127, 139, 205
Ghost Milk: Calling Time on the Grand
Project 19, 89
Gibson, Chris 139, 141, 145, 147
Gilmartin, Patricia 2034
Ginsberg, Allen 87

PROOF
306

Index

Girl at the Monceux Bakery, The


(1963) 58, 65
GIS see geographic information
systems
Glasgow 139, 148
global navigation satellite systems 2
global positioning system 23, 9, 19,
47, 90, 114, 1601, 163, 1656, 168,
175, 219, 256
GOAD fire insurance maps 126
Godard, Jean-Luc 64
Golan Heights 2412, 248
Gold, John R. 2034
Google Android 160, 179
Google Earth 4, 6, 47, 127, 1667,
205, 209
Google Latitude 165, 179
Google Maps (2008) 1, 3, 4, 21
Google Maps 1, 2, 6, 910, 212,
90, 154, 157, 1613, 165, 168, 170,
174, 177, 205, 2845
Google Mobile (2008) 21
Google Scholar 11
Google Street View 1, 21, 208
Gordon, E.O. 87
GPS see global positioning system
Green Line 241, 243, 2534, 2589,
290
Green Ray, The (1986) 63
Greenwich Village 2712, 295
grime 129, 134, 137
Haienda, Manchester 147
Hackney, That Rose-Red Empire 923
Haifa University, Israel 241
Hammett, Jerilou and Kingsley
Hammett 2678
hand-drawn maps 19, 128, 133, 136,
138, 141, 187, 22930
Handsworth 150, 154, 156
Hankinson, Alan 36
Hanna, Stephen P. 72, 117, 218
Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri 4
Harley, Brian 12, 30, 334, 39, 48,
50, 115, 203, 205, 211, 296
Hrnsand 75
Harvey, David 62, 66, 239
Haussmann, Baron 57, 62, 64, 66
Haweswater 110

Heidegger, Martin 30
heritage plaques 75
Herzog, Werner 96
Hewitt, Nicholas 64
Hewitt, Rachel 345, 41
Hindle, Paul 50, 111
hip hop 123, 129, 134
Home of Metal, West Midlands
144
Huggan, Graham 21920, 2334
Hutchinson, William 37, 39,
42, 44
hydraulic 19, 1015, 10910,
11315, 11718
hydraulic mapping 19, 11718
indexicality 3, 56, 14, 2923
indigenous mapping 10
Industrial Revolution 101
Ingold, Tim 5, 17, 136, 1412, 233
interdisciplinarity 11, 1617, 2930,
45, 47, 4950, 197
Iraq 290, 298
Isle of Grain 89
Israel 237, 2414, 2468, 2501,
2534, 2569, 2978, 301
Israeli Knesset 253
Israel-Palestine 237, 2423, 257
Iturrioz, Teresa and Monica
Wachowicz 261
Jameson, Fredric 4, 14, 30, 23740,
2567
Jarvis, Robin 41
jazz 139, 147
Jordan 244
Joyce, James 99
Joyce, Lucia 96, 99100, 119
Kain, Roger 2978
Keaton, Buster 61
Keiller, Patrick 789, 91
Kerouac, Jack 50, 96
Kerrigan, John 15, 30, 45
kibbutz 2467
Klee, Paul 141
Klenotic, Jeffrey 723
Krims, Adam 145
Krygier, John 13, 205, 211

PROOF
Index 307
Kuznar, Lawrence and Oswald
Werner 21617, 219, 227, 230,
233
La Cecla, Franco 263
La Valle (1972) 71, 81
Lafrry, Antonio 56
Lake District 23, 323, 35, 389,
42, 445, 47, 501, 107, 110,
11213
Lashua, Brett 1234, 141
Last of Bed-Stuy, The 2745, 277
Le Samourai (1967) 77
Least Heat-Moon, William 92
Lebanon 2434, 248
Lefebure, Molly 37
Lefebvre, Henri 16, 22, 30, 78, 80,
164, 257
Lennon, John and Paul
McCartney 150
Lewis, Wyndham 91
Ley, David
Lichenstein, Rachel 97, 99
Lights Out for the Territory 85
Lilley, Keith D. 301, 45, 48
literary cartography 29
literary mapping 31, 45, 47, 48, 50
Liverpool 10, 16, 1819, 74, 789,
81, 1236, 12930, 1323, 1358,
140, 1479, 182, 1901
Liverpool Institute for the Performing
Arts 130
locational media 5, 76, 77
locative media 2, 19, 163, 241
London 610, 22, 59, 78, 867,
8990, 92, 94, 9699, 103, 117, 126,
150, 165, 179, 191, 226, 267
London Orbital 87, 90, 94, 99
London Underground 59
Long, Richard 10
Longdendale valley 106, 110, 112
Lost Highway (1997) 3, 7
Lost Horizon (1937) 71
Love in the Afternoon (1972) 57, 66
Lowell, Percival 290
Lud Heat 18, 857, 91, 97
Lustick, Ian 240, 253, 257
Lynch, Kevin 6, 76, 141, 156, 238,
2567, 264

Macfarlane, Robert 36, 92


machinic city 102
Made in Birmingham: Reggae Punk
Bhangra (2010) 144
Magaluf 20, 2203, 2267, 230, 233
Magritte, Rene 13
Majorca Daily Bulletin 221
Manchester 18, 19, 101, 10511,
11315, 11718, 1479, 182, 184,
209, 210, 276
Manchester Ship Canal 108
Manhattan 2701, 275, 292, 295
Mappa Mundi 88
mapping impulse 534, 58, 63, 65,
77
Mapping the City in Film 79, 83
Mapping the Lakes 45, 47, 4950
Mapping the Streets 184
marketing 7, 18, 20, 734, 135, 148,
157, 166, 20112
Mars 2901, 300, 302
Mattern, Shannon 145
McKean, Dave 85, 87, 99
McQuire, Scott 57
Meiselas, Susan 184
memoryscapes 20, 183
mental mapping 5, 20, 63, 77, 182,
190, 206, 209, 23740, 243, 248,
250, 254, 2567, 263
see also cognitive mapping
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice 6
Merseyside County Council 135
methodology 1819, 42, 44, 79,
1234, 132, 13840, 225, 238
Michael Hoppen Gallery 6
Middle East 20, 241, 243, 254,
292
Midland Arts Centre 144, 155
Monmonier, Mark 155, 2035, 301
Moore, Alan 87, 99
More, Thomas 71
Moretti, Franco 445, 478, 132
Morse, Margaret 2
Movie Map North Wales 745
movie maps 745
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus 146
Munich 96, 100
Murray Schafer, Raymond 146
Museum of London 139, 165

PROOF
308

Index

Music Experience Project,


Seattle 147, 158
Music Map of Birmingham 144
musicscapes 19, 132, 140
My Girlfriends Boyfriend (1987) 62, 66
Myspace 132
National Geographic Society 283
National Museums Liverpool 123
navigation 23, 5, 18, 20, 689, 75,
79, 90, 156, 1602, 169, 177, 179,
202, 204, 210, 241, 256
Nettl, Bruno 139
New York 20, 66, 162, 2601, 2667,
26970, 272, 276, 2912, 294
Nishino, Sohei 68
North Carolina 73, 2813, 290, 299
North West Water 105
nostalgia 7980, 139
Nouvelle vague 64
Occupied West Bank 241, 247,
2515, 2589
Ogborn, Miles 49
Okely, Judith 230
Open University of Israel 23, 241,
2445, 258
OpenStreetMap 206
Ordnance Survey 34, 8990, 112
Oxford 89
Palestine 237, 2423, 250, 2567,
290
palimpsest 41, 47, 79, 139, 181
Palmanova 20, 2203, 2267, 230,
233
Panorama project 260, 271
Papadimitriou, Nick 18, 92
Paris 10, 18, 53, 557, 5960, 6266,
68, 77, 96, 99, 126, 238, 264, 2767
Parish Maps 810, 22
participant observation 124, 224
participatory mapping 20, 184, 192,
194
Patterson, Simon 10
Peak District 110
pedagogic 7, 18, 20, 260, 2634,
269, 271, 2767
Penny Lane 150

Penz, Francois 55
Perec, George 264
performative 6, 18, 21, 69, 265, 284,
2923, 2956
Peripatetic Box 20, 2601, 2635,
2679, 271, 273, 2759
Perry, Seamus 32
Personal Mapping in NYC 20, 260,
269
Peterborough 95
Petit, Chris 94, 99
phenomenology 20, 334, 41, 216,
233
Pile, Steve 133, 178
Place de lEtoile (1965) 56
Poe, Edgar Allan 87, 89
post-tourist 75, 76
Power of Maps, The, exhibition 120,
285, 300, 302
Poulter, Simon 144
psycho-geography 6, 10, 18, 20, 36,
634, 77, 912, 153, 238, 260, 264
Raleigh Transit Authority 283
regeneration 7, 1920, 74, 123, 128,
14041, 148, 183
Renaissance maps 201
Renan, Ernest 139
Rendez-Vous in Paris (1996) 58, 63
reservoirs 1045, 110
Rheingold, Howard 163
Rive, Richard 185
River Thames 89
Robinson, Arthur 284
Rodinsky, David 18, 87, 969
Rohmer, Eric 18, 5367, 77
Royal Anthropological Institute 217
Royal Liverpool Philharmonic
Hall 126
Ruppin Academic Centre, Israel 241,
2578
Russell, Bertrand 292
Salford 1820, 1815, 1913, 196
Salford Waterworks Company 110
Salzburg 146, 264
sat-nav 2, 1601, 167, 175
Saussure, Ferdinand de 281
Seattle Office of Film and Music 147

PROOF
Index 309
Second World War 128
Self, Will 92
Selwyn, Tom 224
sewage 1045, 108
sewers 1034, 11112, 114, 11617
Shangri-la 71
Shelley, Percy 96
Sinclair, Iain 11, 18, 8599, 138,
208, 267
Situationists 10, 238, 266, 270, 278
smartphone 19, 139, 1601, 1636,
1689, 175, 177, 179
Soja, Edward 1416, 30, 239, 257
Sontag, Susan 261, 263
soundscapes 139, 1446, 148, 150,
153, 1557
Soundtrack to London app 139
Southport 137
spatial anthropology 11, 81
spatial turn 12, 1417, 30, 69
Strathern, Marilyn 225
Streets Museum project 1912, 195
Surrealism 10, 270
Surrealists 266, 283, 299
surveillance 1, 2, 30, 34
Syria 244
Tactical Sound Garden 10
Thacker, Andrew 312, 42, 445,
48
Thailand 297
Thirlmere 110, 11920
Thompson, Emily 146
Thornton, Sarah 136
Thrift, Nigel 102, 105, 133, 161
Time Out Book of London Walks 91
Times Atlas of the World, The 283
tourism 7, 15, 19, 62, 726, 81, 91,
135, 147, 154, 1567, 205, 218,
2201, 224

Toxteth, Liverpool 182, 191


travel film 72
trekking 255
Tuan, Yi-Fu 141, 237, 239
Turchi, Peter 138
Twitter 9, 153, 162, 178, 180
Tzanelli, Rodanthi 74, 76
UK crime map 9
UK SoundMap 1556, 158
University of Liverpool 16, 79, 125,
130
urban music 134
utopia 71
Van den Berghe, Pierre 219
Varda, Agns 94
Vergunst, Jo Lee 233
Versailles 290
Visit Britain 74, 81
Wagner, Richard 146
Waltham Abbey 90
Warner, Marina 99
wayfinding 1, 4, 7, 9, 17, 233
Welsh Assembly 75
Westphal, Bertrand 49
Whiteley, Sheila 146
Whitman, Walt 271
Whittlesey Mere 96
wikification of mapping 210
Winichakul, Thongchai 297, 301
Winters Tale, A (1992) 58, 62
Wood, Denis 2, 9, 1214, 21, 30,
115, 205, 280301
Wordsworth, William 34
World Museum Liverpool 125, 138
You Are Not Here 10
YouTube 1