Going Deeper or Flatter: Connecting Deep Mapping, Flat Ontologies and the Democratizing of Knowledge

Abstract

Abstract:The concept of "deep mapping", as an approach to place, has been deployed as both a descriptor of a specific suite of creative works and as a set of aesthetic practices. While its definition has been amorphous and adaptive, a number of distinct, yet related, manifestations identify as, or have been identified by, the term. In recent times, it has garnered attention beyond literary discourse, particularly within the "spatial" turn of representation in the humanities and as a result of expanded platforms of data presentation. This paper takes a brief look at the practice of "deep mapping", considering it as a consciously performative act and tracing a number of its various manifestations. It explores how deep mapping is a reflection of epistemological trends in ontological practices of connectivity and the "flattening" of knowledge systems. In particular those put forward by post structural and cultural theorists, such as Bruno Latour, Gilles Deleuze, and Felix Guattari, as well as by theorists who associate with speculative realism. The concept of deep mapping as an aesthetic, methodological, and ideological tool, enables an approach to place that democratizes knowledge by crossing temporal, spatial, and disciplinary boundaries.

Rivers—mouths—tides—memories: A creative, inter‐deep‐mapping of two river/tidal places. Love of place, memory and affect; movements, patterns, marks, and practices of care

“…McLucas (2010) describes how deep mapping "brings together the amateur and the professional, the artist and the scientist, the official and the unofficial, the national and the local." The use of deep mapping as an aesthetic and methodological instrument democratizes knowledge by weaving temporal, spatial, and disciplinary threads into one practice (Springett, 2015).…”

A Flat Ontology in Spatial Planning

“…Just as these ideas have received increasing enthusiasm in a number of scientific and professional domains, they have also received severe critiques, some more nuanced than others (Springett 2015). Several scholars claim that you can't place humans and objects on an equal footing, since then one would also ignore human values and slip into a general uncaring nihilism (Segall 2011).…”

Features and Consequences of Flat Ontology in Expanded Urban Planning

“…3) an epistemological resistance towards homogeneous reduction, meaning that planning requires the application of multiple methods, as well as digital and non-digital enabling tools (Horelli 2002;Springett 2015). 4) the importance of the connections and relationships among specific types of entities, not the entities themselves, meaning that constantly occurring new groupings (assemblages) and also the issue of hybrid or co-governance becomes prominent (Mäenpää, Faehnle 2017).…”