“The major difference between maps and pictures is that maps are products of land surveys that far exceed the perceptible realm of a given observer, thus they cover a wide expansion of a territory …The role of the reader is to decipher this data, in order to extract or to learn from it information that is beyond his/her faculties of direct perception. Pictures, on the other hand, are conventionally meant to be looked at as a whole —thus in their macro-scale—and usually correspond—or conventionally allude— to the artist’s perception, that is offered as a new visual perception to the viewer. Looking closely at the broad body of material that is labeled as road-maps of Edo and early Meiji Japan, it is not unusual to find elaborate imagery integrated with symbols of cartography. These maps are stylistically and functionally open
carrying many influences from the visual arts. At the same time, if a map is a map because of its accurate depiction of a space, many pictures may be found to have more qualities of maps than artifacts actually labeled as maps.” (Traganou, p.24-25)
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/tokugawa/items/1.0216572#p0z-5r0f:tokaido
So far in this course, we have been given the challenge of deciphering what maps really are. Are they constructed “theories” as Turbull said, or “a form of graphic representation that takes as its frame of reference the physical environment” as stated by Berry? Without really considering the implications of defining what it is or its purpose, I would assume that most people think of a map simply as a tool that guides its reader from point A to point B. However, as I mentioned in my previous response, maps can only be defined using a culmination of all of the different aspects (cultural, sociopolitical, geographical, etc.) that are contained in the various definitions available. The map I will be focusing on today, the Tōkaidō gojūsantsugi ichiran, is from the Edo period (1839), and actually seems to defy traditional conceptions of what a map is meant to do/be.
In this week’s reading, one paragraph in particular stood out to me. In this paragraph (quoted above the beginning of this response), Traganou attempts to unequivocally distinguish maps from pictures. However, as they state in the reading as well as what we can see from the Tōkaidō gojūsantsugi ichiran map, the distinctions were often blurred in the maps of the Edo period (of course, this blurred distinction is not at all exclusive to Edo maps). The most important aspects I gathered from Traganou’s distinction are that maps “far exceed the perceptible realm of a given observer” and that pictures are supposed to be “looked at as a whole” and that they “allude to the artist’s perception”. These distinctions, while valid in most cases, are seemingly defied in an innumerable number of cases. In the example of the aforementioned Tokaido map, while the scope is definitely greater than an individual’s immediate perception, there is plenty of artistic injection, and could easily be “looked at as a whole” work of art.
In the last sentence of the aforementioned quote, Traganou states the paradoxical nature of such distinctions made in the former portion of the paragraph. Are maps supposed to be an accurate depiction of geographical space that is meant to be deciphered by the reader? In that case, what makes the depiction of Kyoto in the Tōkaidō gojūsantsugi ichiran any more “map-like” than, let’s say, an accurate overhead painting of the city? Is the latter technically considered a map at this point?
Looking at the Tōkaidō gojūsantsugi ichiran, we can immediately tell that this map is not necessarily an accurate representation of geographical spaces, nor would it be particularly useful in guiding a traveler attempting to travel to Kyoto. On the other hand, the map has artistic flair and beauty to spare. I would much rather hang this particular map up on my wall as a decoration to admire than to be stranded with it as a tool somewhere on the Tokaido route in Edo Japan. If I were to classify this work, I would definitely lean in the direction of art over map. However, artistic style is a cultural phenomenon in itself, and once again this map shows us that maps are much more than simply a tool for geographical navigation.