Originally Posted by
GrimFinger
Actually, out of all of your maps that I have thus far encountered, this particular one would be my least favorite. If I said that I love this piece, I would be lying. Why? Because I don't. Indeed, what is there about it that we should love?
Understand, as a general rule of thumb, your artistic prowess commands my respect. You're not just a cartographer - you're an artist. You don't just make maps, you create art. Your cartographic legacy is nothing to be sneezed at, and on the whole, your art is quite worthy of admiration.
But. This. Piece. My, oh my, oh my! And the great irony in it is that this "rendering process" and this "messy oil painting result," as you affectionately refer to it - these things that you, yourself, love so much about this map, lie at the very heart of what I dislike the most about it.
Yes, beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder, and art is a subjective experience. Yet, these very same eyes of mine that love so much about a great many of your other maps are the very same eyes that look upon this particular map and wonder to myself, "Where's the artistic beef with this one?"
If I were to title it, I would likely dub this one Brush Strokes Gone Mad. At a casual glance, this one, too, has the mark of beauty about it. Compared to many cartographers on this site (Nay, compared to MOST cartographers on this site!), your work on your worst day utterly dwarfs their best work on their best day. After all, you do grand stuff. You don't reach for the small. You have skill, you have talent, you have confidence - and map after map map, it shows. Your maps ooze with things that lesser cartographers can only dream of.
Tell me, what - exactly and specifically - about this particular map distinguishes itself from others of your cartographic work that came before it. No doubt, others that gather here will think that I've gone mad, criticizing your handiwork, at all. But I've no grudge to bear. To the contrary, I count myself among your legion of fans. Yet, when I compare this work to other of your work, should I walk away with the impression that this is your best work (or even one of your best works)?
In fairness, though, you didn't advertise it as one of your best works. What you said is you hope we'll love it. Again, though, what is there present in it that we should love? As Elizabeth Barret Browning might say, how do I love thee, let me count the ways?
And then when I in my mind proceed to begin to count, quickly I stop. Oh, to be sure, I want to count. I do so yearn to count. But the numbers will not come to me. But why? Why? I ask myself, "Why?!"
Forget the brushwork taken to excess. What about this map is imaginative, truly imaginative? It isn't the topography. It isn't the lettering and the labels. It isn't even the font work. It certainly isn't the coloring.
Could it be the border work? Nope, definitely not the border work. From what I have encountered of your map work previously, border work tends to be a strong suit of yours. And here, on this map, the best part of it for me is to be found at top center. Otherwise, compared to other of your border work that preceded it on other maps, detailing that some might consider to be exquisite is largely absent.
You have so much talent that you can afford to take for granted what so many cannot. Nothing that you produce is likely to be perceived by men to be ugly. It's just that simple and straight forward. And in a way, that's a good thing - a really good thing! But in another way, it's not such a good thing.
I challenge anyone and everyone to cite for me the single best thing about this map. More than anything else, what one specific thing about it is its visual crown jewel? When I actively set out to look for it, my eyes are always drawn away from the map to the portion of border work at top center. None of the mountains or forests or rivers reach out and grab my eye. But perhaps my eyes deceive me. By all means, set my eyes straight. What about the visual landscape dominates the eye, and instantly commands your love and affection? Which land mass steals both eye and heart?
When I just sit and stare at it, and allow my eyes to roam all over it at length, I end up feeling as though there's insufficient space for the land masses, themselves, to visually breath. Even when zoomed in, this feeling and this impression doesn't change. And this, I feel, is due to the scale of the land masses being depicted relative to the space of the canvas. In other words, the canvas is too small for the visual challenge that lies before it. This invariably ends up robbing not just the viewer, but the artist, as well.
Who am I to complain, though? Indeed, who is anyone to complain? Should I just rubber stamp this one and send it through? It's a done deal. It requires approval from no one. Besides, there's always the next one, right?
Let me ask you, l'Arpenteur, if I may, what do you consider your single greatest skill set or talent, as a cartographer? Clearly, you're talented and gifted in a number of different ways, but of them all, in which do you consider your mastery to be the most pronounced?