In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Deconstructing the Map after 25 Years: Furthering Engagements with Social Theory
  • Leila M. Harris (bio)

The introductory paragraphs of “Deconstructing the Map” clearly spell out Harley’s aim. As he writes, “We should encourage an epistemological shift in the way we interpret the nature of cartography” (1989, 1). A quarter century later, it is clear that this imperative has generally been well heeded – we read, interpret, and theorize maps differently. As other contributors to this volume make clear, because of technological and other shifts, we also engage in map-making very differently. Following from the postmodernist and deconstructivist turn, elements of Harley’s core concern no longer appear to be central. We no longer simply accept “what cartographers tell us maps are supposed to be” (1989, 1). Rather, there is often deep and thoughtful questioning, critique, and genealogical investigation of how particular maps came to be, or what they represent (and do not represent). Importantly, a large number of works in the history of cartography and critical cartographic traditions have also taken up Harley’s invitation to think carefully about the social and political effects of cartography and particular maps as imparting “a sense of the world.” Recent interventions along these lines also foreground the effects that maps have for users, societies, or socio-natures. While I certainly recognize that this sort of critical gaze has not permeated all dimensions of cartographic theory and practice, it is undeniable that Harley’s work has been a strong guidepost in establishing these as key concerns for ongoing work.

In this brief article, I aim to first detail and celebrate several aspects of Harley’s interventions, noting a few features of the text that remain highly apposite, particularly from my perspective as a scholar of nature–society and social justice. It is important to note from the outset that I am not a cartographer and do not consider mapping to be elemental to my work. Yet when I read “Deconstructing the Map” some years ago, it nonetheless coloured how I thought about and approached other relationships and processes more core to political ecology, environmental justice, and other of my research foci. After highlighting some of the ways I have engaged with critical cartographic work (largely in relation to conservation mapping and political ecology, together with Helen Hazen), I move quickly to the main interest of this article. That is to turn to several points of engagement that might help us move beyond some of Harley’s key insights and invitations. Specifically, in his discussion of deconstruction, Harley signals an interest in “aporias, blind spots, or moments of self contradiction – those unsettling forces ‘at the margins’ “ (1989, 8–9). Given that a major contribution of his work was to bring social theory to discussions in cartography, I am left wondering about other frontiers and social theoretical influences that might offer productive points of engagement for ongoing work in this field.

Highlighting several social theoretical avenues of inquiry that remain “at the margins” for much of critical cartographic inquiry, I highlight potential intersections with feminist and queer theory (notably the work of Judith Butler) and with nature–society work – notably interest in posthumanism and the “more than human” – as well as potential insights from post-colonial scholars and concepts (for instance, from the work of Gayatri Spivak). While some progress along these lines has already been made, my interest in highlighting these openings is to invite further thinking along these lines. Doing so serves to respond to the need that Harley lays out to continue “to search for the social forces that have structured cartography and to locate the presence of power – and its effects – in all map knowledge” (1989, 2). In brief, I ask, beyond post-structuralist influences of direct interest to Harley (e.g., Derrida, Foucault), are there other productive openings that might be offered by feminist, queer, post-humanist, or post-colonial thought? If so, what types of questions and insights might be offered “at the margins” to continue to “unmap” and rethink cartographic epistemologies and products otherwise?

Before I turn to these potential openings, it is worth reiterating a few aspects of Harley’s work, and the entire body of work...

pdf

Share