Tuesday’s readings and the guest speaker, Ruth Mostern
discussed Google Earth. Both the readings and Mostern described the advantages
and disadvantages of Google Earth and other online maps. The advantages include
the fact that anyone can easily use Google Earth, plus, the entire world is
included on Google Earth. However, the disadvantages come from the fact that
Google Earth is technology, and as Ruth Mostern said, “technology is only as
good as it is.” Therefore, there are often distortions and alterations in the
images on Google Earth. For instance, when the environmentalists wanted to stop
logging, they turned to Google Earth as a resource, however, the images they
used were slightly distorted. Thursday’s readings were about Aerial Perception
and abstract art. At first, I didn’t see a connection between Tuesday’s and
Thursday’s readings. However, Mostern discussed the difference between apparent
realism and accuracy. I think that society tends to believe all technological
advancements are always reliable and accurate, but in reality, the technology
does not always have the most (and correct) information. Technology is apparent
realism. On the other hand, society seems to criticize abstract art. However,
abstract art can have even more and accurate information than technology. For
instance, Joyce Kozloff’s pieces in American
History, that Dr. Kaplan was talking about in lecture, contains a vast
amount of information.
I like that you bring up the distortion of Google Earth! It's very interesting that the map is made to be perceived in a way that is mainly beneficial to the larger companies. I almost thought that idea of tracking using google maps was quite interesting. It's scary! I feel that at that point, once tracking is involved, it is all accuracy.
ReplyDeleteAn important part of apparent realism versus technical accuracy is the issue of making information more understandable. The idea that the facts must be altered in order to best be understand is what, for me, creates the clearest link between the issues with Google Earth and abstract artists that feature landscapes. While the painters and multimedia artists that we studied in the reading and in class on Thursday are depicting physical places and can (sometimes) be recognized as such, they are trying to communicate even more than a truly accurate representation could. Only through manipulating the rendering of the land are their messages able to be portrayed. Although this often seems far from the concept of "apparent realism," it certainly isn't technical accuracy. The same methods that Google Earth uses to make the Earth an understandable object for a layperson are then used in the service of making complicated political, social, and national notions about the land seen from above understandable through imagery.
ReplyDeleteBefore taking this class, I thought that a map displayed the world how it is. I was blindly accepting that a maps apparent realism and lifelike portrayal made it fact. I now realize that maps cannot possibly show everything about a place and cannot always be accurate. Maps however, are a means of communicating specific information and even concepts that the mapmaker wants to convey. They are not always 'true' or even 'false'. They can sometimes be a point of view. I realize now that it is good to evaluate our sources of each map. Some good questions to ask when looking at any map could be: who has made the map and why? what was the message they wanted to get across? is there a company or group that has paid for the map to be dispersed? what is the intended audience? what era in history is it from? ect and ect.
ReplyDeleteI also like how you point out that technology is apparent realism. It makes me think that perhaps we sometimes put a little too much faith into something like a map just because it comes across as something scientific. Just because something has been rendered using the latest technology does not mean it is without human, computational, or other bias. At the same time, maps are made to convey a message. The challenge seems to be: how does one make a clear and impactful message while keeping the information as accurate as possible?
-Michelle Finch