Mappenstance.

A Mexican-American War Overview Map generated by the United States Military Academy is certainly a qualified map for Map of the Week. This map illustrates the vast territorial expansion of the United States because of the Mexican-American War. Mexico lost half of its land as a result of the Mexican-American War! Not only did the war change the map of the United States, it changed the diplomatic relations of the United States and Mexico.

Imagine the contiguous United States without the American southwest? Can you? Well, if the United States had not won the Mexican-American War in 1848, the United States would strikingly different.  The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) stemmed from the United States’ annexation of Texas on December 29, 1845. Mexico felt that the United States had no right to annex Texas as Texas was part of Mexico until the Texas War of Independence in 1835. Mexico warned the United States that an annexation of Texas would lead to a war between Mexico and United States.

The Mexican-American War Overview Map highlights the disputed territory that caused a war between Mexico and the United States. This United States Army produced map also highlights the blockades set by the United States Military and the important military battles of the war. This map is deceiving, at a casual glance it appears to be a map of Northern Mexico during wartime, it is only after the viewer looks at the legend, does the viewer discover this is a map of the territorial expansion of the United States through military aggression.

This map illustrates a critical period in the United States’ history as a nation, the era of territorial expansion. If America had not won the Mexican-American War, if the America was not given Mexico’s land in the Treaty of Hidalgo, how would the map of the country look? What would America be like  it was not 50 states, if the American southwest were not a part of America? These jarring questions were at one time real possibilities; the United States even with its superior military force was susceptible to defeat. How would the national identity of the United States be different if there were no American Southwest?

The Mexican-American War Overview Map is not a historical document; it was not produced at the end of the war for the general public. The Mexican-American War Overview Map is a modern day map produced to teach military history to military students. There is no specific author credited for this map production rather it is a product of the United States Army at-large. This map is an ode to Army General greats, General Zachary Taylor and General Winfield Scott and their military brilliance which won the Mexican-American War. The map accompanied by a timeline of the war referencing important military battles during the war as well as a synopsis of both Taylor’s and Scott’s campaigns. Why would the army not praise two of its own who won the war that allowed Mexico to cede a half of its national territory to the United States?

The United States used its superior military force and resources to conquer Texas as well as force Mexico to cede its land. Through the use of maps, the United States was able to strategize how to defeat Mexico, mark where it had beaten Mexico, and redefine its territorial dominion. With the massive gain of territory for the United States, new maps including the territory won by the United States were created, and America’s dominance in North America reaffirmed. The United States’ ability to acquire territory from its weaker neighboring nation showed the United States shift from a relatively new nation-state into a Western Hemisphere superpower. The aftermath of the Mexican-American War was the undisputed imperium of the United States over the Western Hemisphere.

     At first glance, Jolly Lindgren’s 1936 map, “A Hysterical Map of the Yellowstone Park with Apologies to the Park”, immediately pulls you in with its intensely mustard-yellow color  and its “Smileage Guaranteed” promise. Its initial intrigue is a result of its strangeness and deviation from the typical historical and roadmaps of the period, but upon further analysis of its historical context, this map gains a deeper meaning as a tool to mitigate the cultural anxiety of Americans during the Great Depression.

Firstly, a description of Lindgren’s map: The entire park is colored yellow, possibly indicative of the park’s name, with the roads clearly marked in red. All throughout the map are drawings of mountains and their respective elevations. These elevations are the only numbers on the map. The most obvious missing parts of the map are the legend and scale, which is ironically replaced by a musical note scale. The locations of interest are accompanied by small, pictorial representations of their names. For instance, Hot Springs is literally a picture of springs that are sizzling. These interest points are included for the benefit of a tourist; the map shows hotels, large waterfalls, peaks, Yellowstone’s famous geysers, and so on.

This map was created during the Great Depression and it represented one possible way that Yellowstone was imagined, which created a sense of escape for its dispirited readers during this time of great suffering for America and the world, The Great Depression is most often remembered as the decade of bread-lines, Hoovervilles, and the plunging of the American morale. From this psychological pit emerged the humor of the 1930s, which served to combat the “creeping paralysis of will and spirit that had sapped the American people”(American Literary). Lindgren implements this 1930’s humor in the creation of his map of Yellowstone Park in order to lift the burdens of his audience, if only for a few moments.  Among the characteristics of 1930s humor is the use of silliness. The original intention behind creating Yellowstone Park was to protect its natural “curiosities” and “wonders” (National Parks for). Lindgren uses these “curiosities” to project silliness on to the map with small pictorial representations, from the “Hot Springs” on the bottom to the “Gr-r” of “Roaring Mtn.” in the upper half to the left.  In addition, the gaudy yellow that covers the entire map conveys a sense of happiness. Because the yellow is unnaturally mustard-colored, it contrasts sharply with the real natural world and works to transport the reader into a alternate world, where their suffering is alleviated. This color was chosen for all of Lindgren’s Hysterical Maps, as it draws attention to the map while helping its reader escape the anxiety of the Great Depression.

Lindgren’s map also uses another characteristic of the humor of the 1930s, its ironic critique of previous eras, in his Yellowstone map. He incorporates this by using what Wood would call “silences”. The audience expects a traditional historical map, but that expectation is immediately rejected upon reading the title, which makes a point of calling the map “hysterical”. The title also points out that the map includes “ a few minor ? changes”, while the changes are actually huge contrasts to the typical map. Usually, maps try to project a scientific reality through preciseness, but this map makes no such effort; instead, it uses irony to mock this type of mapping. The lack of a legend and the use of an unconventional scale and uncertain compass rose all display this map’s immense amount of irony, amusing the audience while critiquing traditional “scientific” maps. As Wood discusses, legends can be dispensable and when they are used, they only explain a portion of the symbols on a map. By leaving out the legend, Lindgren is challenging the idea that they are needed at all to understand maps. He also notes that a scale is unimportant to his own map by replacing the numerical scale with a musical one, a gently ironic stab at precise, “true” maps. The amusement continues with the compass rose, which claims that  “This part is correct, so ‘elp me,” implying that the rest of the map may be wrong. This directly contrasts with the priority of scientific maps, which focus on being precise and promote “objectivity”. By leaving out numerical measurements and the typical tools of a map, Lindgren is arguing that this objectivity does not really exist in mapping. The end result is a map that is focused on being extremely amusing and symbolic through its cartoonish puns, while playfully subverting conventions of mapping at the same time.

This map also functions as an encouragement to readers to leave their worries behind for a bit and enjoy nature in Yellowstone, if not by physically traveling then by imagining a trip there. During the 1930s, Yellowstone started building shelters for cars in the park and paving its roads in order to accommodate tourist travel. This marked Yellowstone as a destination to visit, a place to spend leisure time, and something to get Americans’ minds off of their troubles. Visitation exploded with the automobile and as a result of the park’s efforts. Lindgren’s map emphasizes this tourism-driven aspect of Yellowstone by clearly distinguishing its roads with a bold red color and displaying the points of interest all along these roads. This purposely shows the ease with which a tourist could visit the “wonders” of the park, effectively shouting “Come and visit!” Even if the reader could not physically go to Yellowstone, due to restrictions of money or daily life, this map creates an optimistic geographic imagination, which Schulten writes about, that relieves the burden of the Great Depression, if only for a moment. It creates a space in the geographic imagination of America where there is the possibility of pure enjoyment. The yellow covering the entire park applies this idea of pleasure to the idea of Yellowstone and helps socially construct Yellowstone to be associated with happiness. All the reader had to do was imagine a trip to Yellowstone and they could escape the burden of the Great Depression, if only for a short time.

Since its introduction in Disneyland in 1966, It’s a Small World After All has been one of the most well known rides with a catchy, and often annoying, theme song.   From the first reindeer on a hilltop in Scandinavia to the final “Au revoir,” this lighthearted boat ride takes many children on their first global adventure in a unique way that, while bright, colorful, and lively, may not be so accurate.

Due to the space available and the implications that come with a children’s boat ride at a theme park, the journey takes place along a cartographically inaccurate route.   The audience travels along an extensive, winding river that travels the “world” with the postcard-perfect pictures of various countries with mechanical dolls dancing and the prominent architecture and stereotypical clichés associated with that country appearing on either side.   Disney focused on the prominent memorable features of each country and displayed what the audience would be familiar and happy with, instead of anything about the country or its culture.  While these icons, such as the Taj Mahal in India or the pyramids in Egypt, are not inaccurate, they minimize the experience of the world to a few main symbols when, in reality, there is much more depth to each country through the culture, the food, and the daily lives of the people.  This same approach was present in the route and layout of the world throughout the ride.   However, Disney’s ideology is crucial because it provides the basis for the “geographical imagination,” or the cultural and geographical understanding, of the world for the majority of people who board this ride and may not have the opportunity to visit all of the countries around the world.

The map “It’s a Small World” by Jonah M. Adkins captures Disney’s ideological viewpoint perfectly.   It displays the journey on a fun, colorful map of the route the boat takes around the world.   On the map, the individual countries are labeled, but there are no lines or barriers to portray a distinct separation; instead, the countries all connect together in one continuous strip.   While it makes sense that a ride appealing to children would present the world as a harmonious, fluid place, this portrayal conceals the reality of the world we live in where borders and wars over territory exist.   Not only is there little distinction between countries on the map, but also the groups of countries that represent the assorted continents and regions flow into each other seamlessly, making it appear as if it really is just one small world after all.

The only tactic that does, however, separate these regions is the color-coding by the cartographer.   The ride may link the entire world together into one, but the cartographic choice to color different regions different colors enables the audience to see the distinction between various areas around the world.   It also gives the viewer a more concrete idea of the order the ride progresses through the world and which regions are put next to one another.   This choice by the cartographer is a political one because he felt the need to distinguish between regions even though that distinction wasn’t present on the ride he is portraying.   This grouping indicates some relationship or similarity between the countries included in each color, which is an inaccurate assumption that ignores the diversity present within each continent.   Conversely, Disney chose not to specifically identify the various continents, even though it did conform to the idea of continents through the order the ride progresses.

The order itself is an interesting component brought out by the map that, while not a choice of the cartographer’s, reveals more about the identity and viewpoint of Disney.   The world is travelled in a circular way, starting in Europe and proceeding to Asia, Africa, South America, and the South Pacific, and ending in North America.   There is a unique contrast between the commencement in Europe, the origin of American colonization and the continent that shaped many of America’s core values, and the conclusion in North America, creating a feeling of returning “home” after a long journey around the world.   These ideological decisions made by Disney show the origin of the ride and the company itself by making its familiar homeland the grand finale.

The other curiosity apparent from this map is Disney’s decision on the location and inclusion of certain countries.   Holland is located next to Spain, Thailand is across the water from Japan, and Hawaii borders Australia.   The image of one small world and the inclusion of visually appealing buildings and dancing machines take priority over global accuracy, which is a curious choice for a ride that introduces many young children to the entire world for the first time.   Given that this may be their first “experience” with the world, Disney’s choices may influence the idealizations or stereotypes of its younger audience.   Along with the inaccurate location of the countries, the choice to make the second-to-last region the South Pacific instead of the final continent of Australia again reveals the ideological nature of the map.   The most efficient method would have been to organize the boat ride through the continents.   Since, however, the continent of Australia only includes one country, it would have paled in comparison to the other continents, so the next-to-last section is the greater South Pacific area instead.   Along with this breaking of the continent theme, certain countries are in questionable locations, such as the inclusion of Hawaii in the South Pacific instead of North America and the placement of Mexico next to Central America in the South American section of the map.

Overall, this map is an excellent portrayal of Disney’s It’s a Small World After All with its bright colors and journey through various countries on the fun boat ride around the world.   However, the map highlights some ideological choices made by Disney that speak to Disney’s identity and the impression it leaves on naïve children.   The themes and décor and the inclusion of stereotypes, along with the general flow of the ride, put the educational value of the ride at risk.