Cultural Geography

value systems in much of this work (Star, 1991).

Numerous other geographers have drawn on this

work (including Alderman, 1998; Chrisman,

1999; Harvey, 2001; Murdoch, 1998; Thrift,

1996). These works are highly relevant to the

growing body of research that probes the consti-

tutive relationships between geography and tech-

nology, and they provide insights into the roles

of geography’s technology in the production of

knowledge.

CONSIDERING KNOWLEDGE

AND TECHNOLOGY

The previous section drew largely on work out-

side human geography to set the stage for

reviewing recent work in cultural geography or

technology. The work I discuss in this section

predominantly relies on poststructuralist litera-

ture. This is distinct from ‘classical’ human

geography work in the mid twentieth century.

Human geographies have regularly engaged the

consequences and implications of technology in

a liberal, structuralist framework. Studies by

Sauer (1925) make technological production an

important part of cultural change, but he con-

fined his consideration to the functions of the

tool. More recent work in cultural ecology

demonstrates the intricate interconnections

between cultural practices and the socio-

economic situation. The cultural geography

engagement with technology focuses particularly

on cyberspace (Adams and Warf, 1997; Kitchin

and Dodge, 2001). In the process, cultural geo-

graphy is opening other forms of geographic

information technology to critical reflection.

Although the most recent cultural geography

of technology focuses on cyberspace, this narrow

thematic focus hides a more profound shift in

cultural geographers’ interests (Mikesell, 1978).

The radar example that started this chapter

pointed to the political and social dimensions of

technology in producing knowledge. In the

remainder of this section, I focus on four exem-

plary areas to show the political and social

dimensions of geographic technology, and to

show the ontological shifts that technology

involves.

Mapping

The discipline of geography, in the service of the

state, military, royalty, wealthy individuals, or

companies, has always made ample use of

technology. Felix Driver (1992) discusses the

imbrication of technology in the practice of

geography, as do many other geographers

exploring the historical development of the dis-

cipline. Whether for colonization or for local

government, geographers have used these tech-

nologies to serve the state. Beyond the powerful

bandwagon effect that technology has had in the

twentieth century, which goes hand-in-hand with

a fetishization of technology, the ideological

dimensions of technology have frequently been

studied in the context of particular activities. For

example, Brian Harley’s (1989; 2001) work is

important in assessing the historic role of maps

in constructing the landscape.

Harley’s analysis of mapping draws on

Foucault, among others, to articulate the nature

of maps. He is especially keen to analyze what

maps leave off – the silences, one could say. His

essays evoke the political dimensions of carto-

graphy, particularly for colonial projects, and in

this sense his work also suggests the influence of

orientalism and its mapping practices (Said,

1978). Harley rests on a critique of the modern

map-maker’s assumptions of objectivity, detach-

ment, neutrality, transparency, exactness, and

accuracy. These attributes correspond to those

characteristics usually ascribed to technology in

western culture. This interesting link points to

the substantial relationships between geography,

technology, and society. Denis Wood (1992)

draws on Harley’s work and develops a semiotic

analysis of mapping symbology and referential-

ity. Pat McHaffie (1995; 2000) has written about

the production process and the organizational

and individual dimensions of producing maps,

thereby extending Harley’s arguments about

political and cultural influences.

Perhaps David Turnbull (1989) has elaborated

the most thorough analysis based on Harley’s

ideas as he eloquently describes the erasure of

non-western thinking in the colonization of

Australia. Robert Rundstrom (1993; 1995) also

takes up this charge in his assessment of the con-

sequences of hegemonic practices on landscapes

in North America and the Native American

cultures who struggle under the dominance of

European colonization. In both these cases, the

interest is in the consequences of technologies,

not the practices. Rundstrom’s work bears

poignant witness to the historic assimilationist

politics of European Americans who fail to con-

sider the cultures they represent in maps. They

both create a colonial landscape that removes

other cultures while representing them as attrac-

tions for Europeanized tourists seeking ‘authentic’

native relicts.

Recently, Denis Cosgrove (2001) has published

a book on the ideological history of geography

KNOWLEDGE AND GEOGRAPHY’S TECHNOLOGY 537

3029-ch29qxd.qxd 03-10-02 11:08 AM Page 537