Kaart van het eiland Rottumeroog 1809

Editor: Here we have Daniël Veelwaard’s “Map of the Island of Rottumeroog,” an engraving from 1809. It strikes me as a very pragmatic piece; all lines and labels. How do you interpret this work, beyond its obvious function? Curator: I see it as deeply enmeshed with power. Mapping has historically been an act of claiming territory, a visual assertion of control. This map isn’t just a neutral depiction of land; it represents a specific gaze, a specific intention to possess and define space. Consider the Dutch context: mapping was crucial to colonial expansion and resource extraction. Editor: So, you're saying it's not just about accurately representing the island, but also about exerting authority over it? Curator: Exactly. Who commissioned this map? Who was meant to use it? Its function was likely tied to economic exploitation or military strategy, reflecting a desire to categorize and manage the landscape and the communities connected to it. Also note, cartography presumes the Western gaze from a higher elevation onto a people and land considered “below”. The assumption is control. Editor: That's fascinating. I hadn’t considered the implications of mapping as an act of dominance. Does knowing that change how we should view landscapes today? Curator: Absolutely. By understanding the history of cartography and its links to colonialism, we can become more critical viewers of contemporary representations of space. We can ask ourselves: Whose perspectives are being privileged? Whose are being erased? It’s about recognizing the inherent power dynamics within any depiction of the land. Editor: I'll definitely look at maps differently from now on! Thank you. Curator: My pleasure! It's vital that we analyze these depictions beyond their immediate impression and consider their historical baggage.