by Douglas Haddow, 8
september 2009
See: http://pblks.com
In his essay You May,
in reference to the relative perceptions of where the Balkans begin and end,
Slavoj Zizek states:
³We are dealing with an
imaginary cartography, which projects onto the real landscape its own shadowy
ideological antagonisms, in the same way that the conversion-symptoms of the
hysterical subject in Freud project onto the physical body the map of another,
imaginary anatomy.²
Nowhere is Zizekıs imaginary
cartography more relevant than in the lives of those who live within the
plastic borders of Serbia and Palestine, two of the most problematically
defined nations on the planet. In these circumstances, where external pressure
and internal conflict come together to create a seemingly impossible situation,
individual perception is more relevant than political status. Inspired by a
need for a more expressive understanding of the Palestinian and Serbian
experiences, Dutch designer Annelys de Vet invited
artists, photographers and designers from both countries to re-map and
personalize the contours of their respective landscapes.
The end product was A Subjective Atlas of Palestine and A Subjective Atlas of Serbia
two intimate, engaging, depressing and often hilarious books that explore
Serbia and Palestine from each contributorıs individual perspective.
PBLKS: Did you have any intentions when working on
these two projects?
de Vet: To be honest; many intentions. The
publications are mappingı a country, region or political entity in a personal
way by the inhabitants themselves. They are invited to map their country in
their own way; be it political, critical, culinary, romantic, negative or
positive. Personal involvement is always a starting point, with the aim to
produce human, unconventional and honest images. With the tools of graphic
design and the stories of the contributors alternative views are developed
towards political entities that lack a nuanced representation in the media.
PBLKS: What interests you about subjective
cartography?
de Vet: If you look at cartography critically one can say
that all cartography is subjective, even though it seems to represent
objectivity. By stating directly that the atlas is subjective, one can come
closer to the context of everyday life in a certain region. A story is never
complete and always more layered than at first glance, especially when dealing
with the notion of identity. With the kind of mapping that is done in these
subjective atlases you can experience the presence of the bigger story, without
explanation. Personal maps also make it easier to identify yourself with the
contributors. In the case of the Palestinian atlas that was of utmost
importance. Palestinians are often shown in the western media as aggressors and
in that role they are a themı and never a weı. Looking at their subjective
atlas, you can see the contributors are just like you and me but living in a
terribly complicated society.
PBLKS: Now that Google has made the whole earth instantly
accessible for anyone with a laptop, what is the future of the atlas?
de Vet: Itıs a great future for the notion of the atlas (in
any form, not printed per se). There is a general growing interest in graphs,
charts and mapping data, also because there is so much more (and new) data
available at the moment (partly thanks to Google). By visualizing data one can
discover (or manipulate) new patterns that provide new information. Those
graphs need to be mappedı again. Not by a search-engine, but by an editor
which brings us back to the atlas.
PBLKS: Why do you think areas like Serbia and Palestine are
so often misrepresented in western media?
de Vet: You could write many books answering this question.
And for both countries itıs an individual answer. But in general I would say
that the press-agencies with the most capital (and the best educated staff) can
influence the news the best and these agencies arenıt located in Palestine nor
Serbia.
PBLKS: Are there any interesting developments occurring
right now in media at large that inspire/depress/provoke you?
de Vet: Many many many. In Dutch politics for instance: I
cannot understand how populism is so powerful in terms of placing irrelevant
topics on the agenda, and in doing so killing the nuance and curiosity out of
public debate. Mass media feeds this tendency at full speed, unable to avoid it
by following the principles of journalism. We cannot stay objective anymore,
but have to speak out and doubt at the same time.