Mappenstance.

October 29, 1929 was one of the greatest shocks to hit the United States. Starting on a day known as “Black Thursday,” on October 24^th, stocks fell over 23 percent. The Country was sent into a frenzy as 9,000 banks closed over the following three years, dragging billions of dollars in deposits down with them. The massive loss sky rocketed unemployment to 25 percent leaving families without money to spare.  In this devastating time people looked for anything to distract them from the struggles they faced daily. With low income, families had to find cheap means of entertainment. Board games became increasingly popular as did radio shows like Lone Ranger and Jack Benny. Even though money was tight people continued to go to movies and musicals as an escape from everyday life.[1]

Elizabeth Shurtleff is known for many different maps including maps of Massachusetts and Isles of Sholes, which are are fully embellished with cartouches on and around the map. similar to her other pictorial maps created in the 1930s, her “Star Map” is brightly colored map contrasted the harsh realities of everyday life. Looking at this map, it is very far from what many people think of when they think of maps. It doesn’t depict geography or land masses and doesn’t seem very scientific. This map instead depicts stars and constellations in a very user-friendly manner. On the top there are simple instructions to “Face south and raise map over head to place constellations” along with a brief key of what the different symbols for star types mean. This map is by no means extremely scientific or technical, but instead is an easy medium for entertainment at a very low cost.

Similar to other means of entertainment like movies and theater, astrology, in some ways, can transport a viewer to a different world, removing the present realities from their lives for a moment. The sky has always been a mysterious extraordinary part of life.  There are still many questions that are left unanswered about the sky and stars, so it is a continuous point of exploration.  Interest in the sky was documented as early as 3000 BCE, through the 1930s and even in present day. The Babylonians first recognized the Zodiac, or the sequence of constellations, that serve as a marking points of passage of time, then later in the 6^th century BCE the Greeks gave the cycle of constellations links to Greek gods, leading to predictions on affairs of state based on the stars and eventually to casting fortunes like we know today as horoscopes[2]. After losing traction in popularity during the new age of enlightenment, Astrology began to come back into popularity in the early 20^th century, with the help of Sepharial and Alan Leo who founded the Astrological Lodge of the Theosophical Society in Great Britain.  Since their revolution western society’s fascination with astrology has continued to grow[3].

The map depicts the constellations in a brightly colored manner that looks more like a painting than an actual map. Instead of lines connecting the stars to show the constellations, images of the animal or figure that the constellation portrays surrounds the stars.  The cartographer of this map chose to omit stars that are not part of the specific constellations leaving only a few for decoration.  The map isn’t a scientific representation of the sky, but instead instructions for every-day individuals to identify constellations and look at the stars.  The simplicity is very important because it can really be used by people of all ages and backgrounds, so the entertainment value of the map is available to everyone. Drawn in a similar manner to the constellations inside the actual map, there are also other images that surround it.  One that especially stands out is at the bottom of the map. It is a depiction of Phoebus Apollo, or the sun god. He is depicted in his four-horse chariot in a yellow circle. This is in reference to the Greek myth that he used this chariot daily to move the sun across the sky. Above Apollo is Diana the moon goddess in an orb representing the moon in the sky. These gods and goddesses included on the map are fairly recognizable to most people. The relatability of the map, makes the users of the map see astrology as something that is assessable to everyone.  Framing the outside of the map is a list of all the constellations, along with riddle like description of the constellation to aid in placing it. For example, Aquarius’s description is “The Water-Bearer pours water into Piscis Australis the southern fish under the House’s head.   The Water-Bearer, next to Capricorn, stretches his right hand.” These riddles add another fun layer to the activities that can be done using the map because all the riddles are like puzzles that can be deciphered along with the main star gazing.

On the top of the map sits two childlike angels, one holding a telescope looking down at the stars and the other holding a book with the opening lines of “Twinkle, Twinkle little Star”. The inclusion of these figures reaffirms that this map is not only for the use of adults but really as an activity for children and their families because” Twinkle, Twinkle little star” is a well-known nursery rhyme. Shurtleff’s cartographic choices were very important to making the map really accessible to all walks of life.

In devastating times people looks for means of escape to remove them from the realities of their everyday lives. The sky is a point of fantasy and wonder, which makes it the perfect means of escape. Elizabeth Shurtleff’s “Star Map” combined a cheap form of entertainment that was vital during the Great Depression along with the wonder of the stars to create the perfect activity map for families to utilize in such a disheartening time.

[1] “WGBH American Experience. Riding the Rails.” PBS. Accessed March 24, 2017. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/timeline/rails-timeline/.

History.com Staff. “The 1930s.” History.com. 2010. Accessed March 24, 2017. http://www.history.com/topics/1930s.

[2] “HISTORY OF ASTROLOGY.” HISTORY OF ASTROLOGY. Accessed March 24, 2017. http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac32.

[3] “Short History of Astrology in the Western World.” Short History of Astrology in the Western World. Accessed March 24, 2017. https://thezodiac.com/weird/history.htm.

If you are a breathing human-being in the United States, or perhaps even elsewhere, you did not go an hour without either hearing or seeing a comment, tweet, picture, video– you name it– regarding the election results on November 9th, 2016. Certainly, with Trump at 62,979,879 and Clinton at 65,844,954 totaling to just over 128.8 million votes, the battle between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump made its mark in American history (Krieg, 2016). The difference in direction of the electoral college and the popular vote was confounding to the media all over the nation. Not only was the result itself unexpected— according to most polls— but the directional divergence had only occurred four other times in history, three of the four occurring before the 20th century.

With solely the numbers in mind, one might think that the visual of the election map would show a relatively even split; a truly “divided” nation would be both numerically divided and geographically divided, right? According to the map of “Clinton’s America” this was not the case. Despite the numbers, Hillary only won 15% or 3,000,000 square miles of the United States’ land mass, leaving Trump with a perplexing remainder of 85% at 350,000,000 square miles. To reflect these numbers, the seemingly small islands of Hillary would harbor 54% of the nation’s population at 174 million Americans (Jacobs, 2017). With some basic calculations, that comes out to 58 people per square mile whereas Trump’s land would host 1 person for every 2 square miles. So what can we determine from numbers alone? Clinton’s voters have had to come from exceedingly densely populated areas, or particularly cities. When looking at the “Clinton’s America” map, the identified cities— Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Boston, Washington, Atlanta, etc.— prove this conjecture to be accurate. While the state is often represented by the city, the city is certainly not represented by the state. Look at New York, for example. When people think of think of the words “New York,” they immediately think of a skyscraper-lined landscape with mass herds of occupants roaming the streets. Much like other U.S. cities, The Big Apple represents the majority of the state’s population, economic activity, and the identification of the state as a whole. Yet, New York City only covers 0.006% of New York state’s total square mileage. These highly populated urban environments, such as New York City, are essentially isolated from the rest of the state, forming— in correlation to the map—islands. The “island” forms an individual entity and harbors a different group of people in comparison to the rest of the state. Cities are known for minorities and cultural diversity. Somewhere in American history, minority groups became linked to liberalism, setting the foundation of Clinton’s America.

 
Let’s now take a step back past the numbers, past the uneven population spread, past any knowledge you have of the United States— and focus only on the geography of the “Clinton’s America” map. The map gives off the perception that Trump not only won the election, but he dominated in the popular vote count as well as the electoral college. Clinton’s America conveys a distinctly inaccurate representation of the 2016’s election results, however it remains fairly accurate in terms of geopolitical spread. The map focusses on geographic accuracy, and does represent a proportional visual of landmass-to-population density. Of course to do this, city-based regions would need to be deliberately skewed. To say the least, it shows how ineffective the portrayal of land area is in determining overall political views in the United States. If an outsider with no knowledge of American politics were to see this map, he undoubtedly would argue that the United States is unquestionably conservative. As we know from the previously stated data, the popular vote was not in Trump’s favor and the results were remarkably close, deeming this map an inadequate way to represent American political stances.

 
So what can we learn from such an unconventional map? The first take away is that the cross between geography and politics can be extremely misleading if misunderstood. One must realize that the majority of the United State’s population lies within the exodermis of the physical contiguous landmass and the archipelago of liberalism contributes more to the nation’s identity than one might perceive. “Clinton’s America” also evokes the question as to whether our current electoral college system is fair in fully representing American democracy. Does the U.S. need to completely repeal the electoral college and rely on popular vote for further elections? Or have the founding principles of the nation become obsolete and simply need to be reformed to allocate growing population distribution? The conception of one map could be all the nations need to recognize and understand whether or not a more equitable system of democracy is necessary to fully express the voice of the people.

References:

Cook Political Report Staff. “56 Interesting Facts about the 2016 Election” National Politics.
December 16, 2016. Accessed March 04, 2017. http://cookpolitical.com/story/10201

Frank Jacobs, “Trumpistan vs. Clintonesia.” Big Think Strange Maps, January 22, 2017.
http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/trumpistan-vs-clintonesia.

Krieg, Gregory. “It’s official: Clinton swamps Trump in popular vote.” CNN. December
22, 2016. Accessed March 04, 2017.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-final-count/.

Never has a map caught my eye so quickly. “A map of the wondrous isle of Manhattan” was created by the cartographer Charles Vernon Farrow in 1926, yet I feel as though I imagined the same captivating New York City he created when I was a child. Farrow was not a famous cartographer, nor did he have truly extensive experience in map making due to his early death, but he encapsulated the wonder and grandeur that massive metropolises often evoke. Farrow creates an intricate and fascinating map of Manhattan Island in one of its most iconic periods, pouring minute details and seemingly irrelevant additions into this work of art. However, this depiction of Manhattan is misleading. Like me, most readers might get caught up in the artistic aspects of the map, instead of the more technical one. Farrow created a romanticized version of Manhattan in this map, ignoring the realistic side. Since maps are generally considered to be factual, or close to it, this over exaggeration of Manhattan’s artistic aspects creates a false presumption about the city’s true state.

This map shows the majority of Manhattan, one of New York City’s five boroughs. It is a pictorial map, one of many created in the U.S. during the 1920s and 30s. Pictorial maps “were not scientific representations of the Earth’s surface, but artistic renderings of places, regions, and countries” (Hornsby).  Manhattan is covered in bright and strong colors and made up of orderly lines. The artistry and detail of the buildings is outstanding, and you feel yourself getting lost on the streets of New York the more you inspect the map. With an almost bird’s eye view of the island, the viewer is given a sense of power, as though they are a giant overlooking a model city. You can make out the smallest window, archway, or even fire escape on the sides of buildings, showing Farrow took great care into the detail of his work. This sense of power from the aerial perspective and attention to detail create an aesthetically pleasing pictorial map.

When a map is pictorial and made more in an artistic view instead of a technical view, the interpretation of the map must be different. This map of Manhattan would obviously not be used for city planning or navigating the streets precisely, but it can give you a sense of how the creator of the map feels about his subject material. Farrow seemed to try to portray Manhattan as a sophisticated and cultured city, drawing and labeling cathedrals, museums, theatres, and colleges on the island. These all may have been there in reality, but Farrow neglects to find and label less artistic and refined buildings and locations, like warehouses and factories. Maps have factual connotations All helped make the city what it was, but Farrow decided to highlight the more glamorous side. There are even some giant money bags and top hats sitting on roofs of buildings, small additions that add to the posh image the city takes on. This may seem like a harmless exclusion, but maps are generally seen as factual pieces of media. Maps have a powerful influence in that they are considered accurate without further investigation. When people view the “wondrous isle of Manhattan”, they will not be seeing an entire part of the city that Farrow omitted. These forgotten portions of the city mean the true nature of Manhattan is not conveyed. The grittier portions of the island add character and contrasting perspectives that becomes missing once you focus on the refined parts of the city alone. This diversity is what many say defines New York City.

One less polished part of city that does get a banner to label it is “The Ghetto”. Positioned at the bottom of the map, “The Ghetto” is one of the only indications that Manhattan has people living there not in the elite class. In the real Manhattan during the 1920s “two-thirds of New Yorkers lived in tenement houses” (The Progressive Era). This divide between the upper and the lower working class is not immediately noticeable in Farrow’s map, but when one of the largest cities in the world at that time is shown with no discernable poverty or problems, it becomes clear something is missing. The Ghetto, placed at the bottom of the map, with little dignity, indicated how poverty and the lower class were considered at that time. The upper class were living comfortable in the Midtown business district (Miller), while the poor were ignored for the most part.

While Farrow seemed to insert social commentary into his work, he also created a map that is lighthearted and fun, almost like a cartoon. The entire island is drawn meticulously, creating an ideal setting for a thriving metropolis. This unrealistic depiction doesn’t care so much about the real Manhattan, as much as the Manhattan it is trying to show people. This subtle omission of less desirable parts of the city, shows how a pictorial map can mislead and sway a reader’s view of a place or city. The map is surrounded by images of cars and people racing about, depicting the bustling and fantastic feel of Manhattan. The cartouche in the bottom right is two couples, dressed in the stereotypical Roarin’ Twenties garb. My favorite example of the ultra fancy Manhattan Socialites, is in the top left cut away section of the map; if you look closely you can see a banner labeled “Polo Grounds”.  The entire piece is reminiscent of The Great Gatsby and the era that it romanticized. This new, over the top cultural boom that was the 1920s is exactly what Farrow is trying to convey with his map. The 20s were a time of lavish overspending and cultural prosperity for the U.S., and what better way to show the world our brilliance by overemphasizing our greatest city’s sophistication (Zeitz).

Being a pictorial map, the actual land of the island seems to be less important than the buildings, bridges, and other manmade structures. This may be commentary on how people viewed New York and other places in America during the 20s. Men and their creations were more important than the land they inhabited. This map makes the viewer feel the grandness that was New York City in the 20’s. This grand image was warranted, as it was a cultural hub and considered by some as the greatest city in the world, but this great city was not all glitz and glamor. There was a tension between the rich and the poor inhabitants of the city, and this allure was displayed through a more artistic representation of Manhattan than a more technical map would have demonstrated. Manhattan was the center of the universe for those who were looking at it in the 1920s, and this map captures its wonder and grandeur.

Works Cited:

HORNSBY, STEPHEN J. PICTURING AMERICA: the Golden Age of Pictorial Maps. S.l., UNIV OF CHICAGO PRESS, 2017.

Miller, Donald. “Built for Business: Midtown Manhattan in the 1920s.” Entrepreneur (2014): n. pag. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.

Zeitz, Joshue. “F. Scott Fitzgerald and the Age of Success.” The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, Accessed 16 Mar. 2017.

“1890–1928.” The Progressive Era | History of Poverty & Homelessness in NYC. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.

Turn on your television, log onto Facebook, or open a newspaper and you will be hard pressed to finish your morning routine without hearing or seeing a news story on immigration. This is not a new phenomenon; immigration policies have lead to the creation of some of the most controversial laws in the history of the United States. Just as fears over terrorism color our perception of immigration today, the spread of fascism and communism dominated the discussion of immigration policies in the years leading up to the outbreak of World War II. The Council Against Intolerance in America, an organization that promoted a wide range a civil rights during the early 20th century, included the map seen below in their wartime pamphlet Calling All Americans which was published in 1940, months after France and Great Britain declared war on Germany. Entitled “America – A Nation of One People from Many Countries,” it was published in an effort to celebrate the diversity, unity, and strength of democracy in the face of fascism and communism rising in the east. This post includes a discussion of the map’s historical context, an analysis of the map’s visual and stylistic elements, and a critique of the map’s purpose and cultural biases.

In the years leading up to the production of this map, immigration was on the forefront of the public’s mind. The United States had just experienced the largest wave of immigration since its founding. Between 1870 and 1930, 30 million immigrants entered the United States, fleeing famine and poverty in search of a better life (Ewing 4). While history textbooks often paint a rosy picture full of fresh starts and prosperity, the process of immigration was arduous and littered with bureaucratic red tape that prevented many would be immigrants from making a new home in United States. The first of several explicitly exclusionary measures, passed in 1882, was the Chinese Exclusion Act, which followed the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Chinese laborers in the west (3). They worked for extremely low wages in agriculture and industry and built many of the western railroads, effectively driving non-Chinese laborers out of work. The Chinese Exclusion Act was only the beginning of a movement that called for more and more stringent immigration regulations. By the outbreak of World War II, immigration had been capped at 165,000 people per year, and was further reduced by the quotas tied to countries of origin and the requirements for obtaining a visa (4). Even as the United States was closing its ports to immigrants, other threats to the country began to surface. In 1929 the stock market crashed, sending the United States and the rest of the world into a period of extreme economic hardship known as the Great Depression. In Europe, still recovering from the devastation of World War I, new forms of government emerged, fascism in Germany, Spain, and Italy and communism in the Soviet Union, dividing Europe in two and challenging the future of western democracy.

The map and the pamphlet try to allay fears of fascism and communism by praising the diversity and strength of the American people. This map is layered in presentational codes that reflect the great variety of the American people’s nationality and religion (Wood 112). The immigrants’ nations of origin are literally bound together on ribbons, bringing to mind the phrase “cut from the same cloth” and unifying these different groups. The illustrations of Americans doing hard manual labor on ranches, in fields, and in factories imply an attitude of self-reliance and hard work, both traditional American values. The map pushes all immigrants in the United States to cohere to these values that are part of a distinctly American identity. In combination with the banners of countries, the codes embedded within the map create a bridge that unites the immigrant with this identity. And what is the reason for the unity? According to the creators of this map- democracy.

Look at the map a little longer and an undercurrent of codes surfaces. Alongside the cultural differences of the American population are illustrations of natural resources, industry, and agriculture. In the southeast, the midwest, and on the west coast the primary sector of the economy, agriculture, mining, and forestry, dominates the landscape. Fields and orchards standout in green, while livestock and mines draw the eye to the little details sketched in black. Principal in the northeast and the midwest is the secondary sector of the economy, manufacturing. Factories with tall chimneys blowing smoke are labeled steel and coal and cigarettes and textiles. They cluster around Chicago, Detroit, and the cities on the northeastern seaboard like moths to a flame. The diversity seen in the country’s commerce mirrors the diversity of the population of the United States. By showing the United States with such abundant natural resources and thriving industry, the map suggests that the country is fully self-reliant, a value that is also emphasized by the depiction of the population. All of these economic bounties fall within the borders of the United States, which implies the strength of the country as a unified democratic nation.

Looking at the pamphlet the purpose of the map is immediately clear, at least how the publishers saw fit to depict it. It states, “This handbook was prepared to help group leaders in planning and organizing programs for this purpose,” that purpose being the study of democracy and the understanding of the propaganda from “dictator nations.” Ironically, both the map and the pamphlet are perfect examples of propaganda. The map celebrates the United States by elevating the hard labor and diversity it depicts to part of the national identity. Additionally, the subdued colors, light blue, dark green, and soft orange create a soft and non-threatening atmosphere quite suitable for educational material. By presenting their biases in this medium, the creators of the map persuade the audience to view the United States and its democracy in a positive light.

At the same time, the authors of the piece express their views on American involvement in World War II, or more specifically their belief in American neutrality. While this map emphasizes the backgrounds of the American people, they are ultimately overshadowed by the American identity. Literally under the umbrella of the title banner proudly proclaiming “A Nation of One People,” the national heritage of the American citizens is minimized and transformed into a single unified identity. Neither the Axis or Allied powers is concealed or highlighted, downplaying support for either side in favor of American neutrality. The economic self-sufficiency is also reflective of non-involvement as the United States faced no monetary threat at the time by abstaining from the war. By depicting the United States and its citizens as separate entities from Allied and Axis nations, this map argues for American neutrality. The United States would eventually be forced into the war by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, only a year after the map was published. In retaliation Japanese immigrants would be sent to internment camps for the rest of the war, as the United States abandoned all pretense of and support for a unified American identity.

While the map serves as powerful emblem of democracy that champions diversity, there are underlying tensions within the map. It is distinctly Eurocentric as it minimizes the presence of Native Americans, African Americans, Asians, and Middle Easterners. While Native Americans are not typically thought of as immigrants, they did at some point migrate to North America. Their representation on the map has been reduced to a portrait of a stereotypical Native American chieftain and a short sentence on the margin of the map. Immigrants from Asia are listed, but their appearance is localized in California and the northeast, and immigrants from the Middle East are not listed at all, despite a large uptick in immigration to the northeast during the late 19th century (Camarota 2). One of the most striking elements of the map is its treatment of African Americans. Here, it is less of a case of under representation, but of label. American politics were steeped in racism during this time; Jim Crow laws governed the lives of African Americans and only one man of African American descent was serving in Congress when this map was produced. This deeply rooted racism peaks through in the map through the decision not to list African Americans by their country of origin. Instead, they are all grouped together under the title of “Negro”, a word which came to be synonymous with “slave” (Bennett 1). There is no attempt by the map’s creators to detail the countries that these slaves came from, though historical records, kept by nature of the slave trade, are available. Even European countries with relatively low immigration numbers are listed and differentiated reflecting the European bias of the mapmakers. So while this map claims to celebrate diversity, in reality the map represses much of the diversity it argues makes democracy and the United States strong.

This map has earned its place as Map of the Week! for several reasons. It is visually exciting and has clear ties to United States foreign relations, the underlying theme of our course. However, what makes the study of this map even more interesting is its relevance to politics in the United States today. The fight over immigration in the United States has existed ever since the creation of the country. Every United States president since Eisenhower has taken executive action on immigration (Wolgin 2). As such, it is unlikely and foolish to believe that a consensus will be found regarding immigration policies, but policy makers and the public should take the opportunity to learn from the propaganda of the past. The former can learn to use propaganda to sway popular opinion and the later can learn to recognize it and understand and even lessen its influence on their daily lives, just as the authors of the pamphlet hopefully wrote in 1940.

References

“America- A Nation of One People from Many Countries.” Calling All Americans, The Council Against Intolerance in America, 1940.

Bennett, Lerone. “What’s In a Name? Negro vs. Afro-American vs. Black.” Ebony, Nov. 1967.

Camarota, Steven A. “Immigrants from the Middle East.” Center for Immigration Studies, 29 Apr. 2013, cis.org/MiddleEasternImmigrantsProfile.

Ewing, Walter A. Opportunity and Exclusion: A Brief History of U.S. Immigration Policy. Immigration Policy Center, 2012, Opportunity and Exclusion: A Brief History of U.S. Immigration Policy.

Wolgin, Philip E. “By the Numbers: Every President Since Eisenhower Has Taken Executive Action on Immigration.” Center for American Progress, 6 Oct. 2014.