On Sin

To make maps, we must sin against the landscape. We distort the earth’s roundness, and we simplify complex realities down to a series of colors and symbols. Ancient trees become a scattering of green pixels on a screen; a horrific battle becomes a labeled dot; and an awe-inspiring bird migration becomes a simple arrow. But this is necessary. Maps work because they abstract and generalize (as noted by Arthur Robinson, who said “the act of generalization gives the map its raison d’être”). They help make reality comprehensible by packaging it into chunks that our brains can digest. However necessary, though, these generalizations are still sins, and maps can never be truly “accurate.” It’s something I’ve struggled with throughout my career. How much should I generalize? I’ve talked about this in the past: If I smooth out a line representing a river, did I do it too much? Or not enough? Would someone else have done it differently? No matter how much I fret, however, my generalizations are…