Mapping cliches

[JefBT]

NedS298: "Isn't fantasy about being creative?"

It should be, but unconsciously we make things related to what we know, so, sometimes it isn't a cliché, but just something that is "regular" to us.

"Why should I try something new?" - not just on maps, but people usually don't try ideas that are totally new, they use what is firmly grounded and established. And that way we fall back in the clichés.

As I live in the southern hemisphere, it was strange for me to see the cold north, and snow (the lowest temperature I had seem in person was 8° Celcius). But I got used to it, since almost all the fantasy books and movies are from the northern hemisphere.

Another cliché: the largest ocean area only apears on the east and west, never on the south or north (well, I did not see any world with a great ocean or sea on the north or south).

[Larb]

I have been guilty of some of those myself at one time or another.

Cliches that stick out most to me are naming cliches - maybe because these are the ones I most consciously try to avoid. From maps with an overly heavy adjective-noun naming scheme through to the ever popular wastes which seem mandatory on many maps. I've seen all kinds: ice wastes, void wastes, burning wastes, shadow wastes, blighted wastes, and of course the ever popular northern wastes. Certain sea names often crop up quite a lot too.

Names also seem to be a measure of what is popular at any given time as well. I'm sure many of you have noticed a lot more maps often include a town or city called "<something> Landing" lately? =P

However using cliches isn't always a bad thing - they are cliches for a reason. Sometimes they are appropriate and some people are able to make them work well. But it is good to be aware of them because they often come about sub-consciously.

[Freodin]

Those of us who draw maps of fantastic worlds and terrains fall too easily for the cliche that what the cartographer made is indeed a correct representation of the land - and that is rather reasonable. We, the person who really made the map, want to show the viewer how the land really is.

But most (famous, antique) real cartographers never saw what they drew. They relied on reports and older maps.

So for every call for the River Police, I want to offer the famous map of China from Joan Blaeu's "Atlas Major" in response.

[NedS298]

Those of us who draw maps of fantastic worlds and terrains fall too easily for the cliche that what the cartographer made is indeed a correct representation of the land - and that is rather reasonable. We, the person who really made the map, want to show the viewer how the land really is.

But most (famous, antique) real cartographers never saw what they drew. They relied on reports and older maps.

That's probably the most truthful thing I've heard about cartography on this forum.

[Meshon]

So for every call for the River Police, I want to offer the famous map of China from Joan Blaeu's "Atlas Major" in response.

Oh wow. That lake in the west...made me laugh out loud. It's like the cartographer is reaching a sharp stick from the past to deliberately jab the river police into a fury. Nice find!

cheers,
Meshon

[JefBT]

Max have a good point, but that's for the past times.

The globalization is really a "global thing" today (with a few exceptions), and all sort of things are running around the entire world, so it's probably not new to a lot of people.

But again, mixing asian elements with european was a great new thing. But now there are euro-asian cliches as well, like ninjas in medieval armor living on european castles following old japanese rules, fighting against kappas and dragons.

A cliche today, may be "vintage" tomorow, lots of variables there, and here I am again, falling into nothing.

I actually think that using some cliches is good, but using only cliches is bad. It's nice to make something new, and mix it with some old and good things.

[madcowchef]

Here's one I'm exceedingly guilty of: Naming things after their appearance on a map. Sure from a top view it might be shaped like a wolf's head, but does it really look anything like that o the people down living next to it at a reasonable scale?

[Jan van Leyden]

Here's one I'm exceedingly guilty of: Naming things after their appearance on a map. Sure from a top view it might be shaped like a wolf's head, but does it really look anything like that o the people down living next to it at a reasonable scale?

Oh yeah, that's a pet peeve of mine. Do the beings of the fantasy world have access to sattelites or how do they know how a geographical feature of several hundred miles would look on a map?

[Slylok]

Oh yeah, that's a pet peeve of mine. Do the beings of the fantasy world have access to sattelites or how do they know how a geographical feature of several hundred miles would look on a map?

They could rename it after they map it out and see that it looks similar to wolf's head regardless of if they did it accurately or not.

[JefBT]

Well we humans use to name things to something that it looks like, or something that we like.

I also name my places that way most of the time, madcowchef, but sometimes I use people names, like in real life places are named after it's founder.

You can also name a forest to something like "Forest of Bananas" or "Monkey Jungle", if is there a lot of bananas or monkeys there, respectively.

Near my hometown there is an ancient mountain formation. From the distance it looks like a giant person sleeping, so it's called "O Gigante Adormecido" ("The Sleeping Giant").