In Sparke’s article (1998), he refers to Chief Justin McEachern’s statement: « we’ll call this the map that roared ». This statement was from a trial regarding a conflict between the Canadian government and two First Nations, who had a conflict about land sovereignty and ownership issues. The First Nations wanted to use a map the western government would understand to claim their sovereignty and to show their rightful territory.

Maps are not a traditional way of knowing for these first nations, but in a trial against a colonizing western government, maps, a western way of knowing, were used to claim legitimacy and land rights. More traditional storytelling methods (oral) would not have « roared » as loud and effectively as a map because they are not widely accepted as legitimate ways of  knowing in the western tradition. So the map was drawn to show people that as first settlers they are the ones who belong here. The map proves that this is where they belong. The first nation created a map of their territory to show that they have rights to the land. 

Thus, the author Sparke (1998) uses the map to show people that the first nation is roaring, fighting for their rights fiercely like a « paper tiger ». The map is a way to show that the First Nations people have a voice, and they needed to use a map to make people understand. A map is more clear than using oral storytelling because it resonates more with western ways of knowing, and the westernized government was the target audience.  

Sparke’s analysis shows that maps are not just paper because depending on who makes the map, it will be different. Maps show what people’s view of the truth is. We can say that map making is another way of storytelling, because it tells the stories of those making it, because they make decisions on what information to include, leave out, and how to present it. It also must be interpreted by the reader, just like a story. First Nations « roared » against colonialism and stolen land issues by drawing, and then showing people the map. Maps are also a way to show power and legitimacy. 

Therefore, we can conclude from Sparke’s analysis that maps are « paper tigers » rather than mere inanimate objects. They are very much living representations of what a certain group has perceived to be « reality ». Even if the map itself is not edited, its interpretation could change over time, so just like oral storytelling it is also interactive with those who interpret it. 

References

Matthew Sparke (1998) A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada,

Cartography, and the Narration of Nation, Annals of the Association of American Geographers,

88:3, 463-495, DOI: 10.1111/0004-5608.00109