And yet, there they are. From the classics going all the way back to R. L. Stevenson's Treasure Island on...
Ever had a hankering to walk Narnia? Not from the movies, but as portrayed in the authentic book series The Chronicles Of Narnia by C.S. Lewis? Cause there's a map for that. (Pity there isn't one to help me find my way out of the back of the wardrobe.)
Of course, the 900 lb. Gorilla of fantasy novels is J.R.R. Token's The Lord Of The Rings trilogy. It's map has become the go-to design for style and substance in the mythical world, with it's stylish details of The Shire, Rivendale, The Misty Mountains, The Sea Of Rhun, The Lonely Mountain, Rohan, Gondor, Mirkwood forest, and even Mordor, which one does not simply walk into, apparently even with a map.
Stephen King avoided the issue through most of his entire magnum opus The Dark Tower, (mostly because the geography of Mid-World is finicky and changes) but finally provided a map in the seventh installment. It's inclusion may be because the reality of the tower is based so much on King's own memories of reading Tolken and being inspired to write something equally as massive, an homage to King's inspiration. Or it may be a case of jumping on the band wagon. Since then, a plethora of maps have been produced, mostly coming out of the Marvel comic book series, but since comics are a visual medium, that's a bit more acceptable.
Even George R.R. Martin and his Game Of Thrones books features a map of the realm, masterfully depicted in the animated opening of the HBO series based on the stories.
There are a few exceptions to rule, J.K. Rowling for example did not include one single map in the Harry Potter novels. No Hogwarts floor plan, no Hogsmeade village, no shopping map of Diagon Alley.
Now, I'm not knocking the practice, per-say. These maps are well thought out, beautifully drawn and highly imaginative. I myself used to spend hours doodling my own made up maps to lands that didn't exist anywhere but within my creative subconscious. The question is why? Why are these maps necessary? I mean, yes, when I read a book I will go and check out the map to position the players in my mind's eye. But is that just an automatic reflex just because the map is there? If there was no map would we comprehend or enjoy the story any less? Is it part of the human need to categorize and label everything, even that which we know to be fake? Or does the inclusion of a map make the fictionalized world that much more real? Does it allow the fan to touch a part of the story that would otherwise be left foreign and unknown? And which is preferable?
How much is too much? When does including a map for a fictional location become less helpful to the audience and more an exercise in vanity? Hey, check out the location map for Waterworld!
For my own thoughts, I think the world should be best left to the imagination. The paint brush of my mind is quite happy to rise to the challenge of filling in those blank empty spots that simply read: "Here there be dragons"... <>
I really enjoyed this post because I can definitely relate to it. A good friend of mine and I would always be creating these fictional worlds as kids and a majority of our time was spent mapping them out because to us this just made our worlds all the more real. Good Times!
ReplyDeleteI love maps but more for aesthetic than useful purposes. I do agree with your point that it does seem lately that in books, movies, and all sorts of mediums that 'empty spots' are being filled in for us and I miss being able to use my imagination. Good read!
ReplyDeleteI enjoy maps in books. I think having the map there helps the journey of the story unfold in a much more simple way. At times, depending on how intricate the map is, they can take away from the reader's ability to imagine the story in their own way. Therefore, I prefer basic maps that just layout the placement of important places in the story. Great post! Thanks for adding the pictures!
ReplyDelete