Comments on: Centreing The Map

By: Fyodor

Fyodor — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 21:31:18 +0000

“We are because we straddle two oceans”

So does Antarctica, mate, but no amount of geopolitical wizardry is going to make penguins politically pivotal.

As I said, we are NOT “between all Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean trade”. We’re not even next door to it. We’re in the next suburb.

By: cam

cam — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:04:48 +0000

We are because we straddle two oceans and that places us between all Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean trade if we politically manouvre ourselves into position through security/trade treaties.

By: Fyodor

Fyodor — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 03:05:50 +0000

I got your point, Cam, but thought it incorrect. Australia is not the geographic fulcrum between your two butterfly wings; Singapore is. The bulk of the trade you mention occurs well North of us, away from our influence, so Australia is not a centre-point, let alone a “natural” one.

By: cam

cam — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 02:30:30 +0000

Fyodor, I think you are missing the point. I just described Australia as being a continent and two oceans. Australia is centred in that map not because of parochial viewpoints or map-making but because the two butterfly wings of influence I have drawn make Australia a natural centre-point.

By: Fyodor

Fyodor — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 01:09:11 +0000

Interesting bet, DD, but the (now infamous) Zheng He map (probably 18th CE), supposedly based upon the voyages of the great Chinese explorer (and thus not Western maps), places China at the middle of the world, which is not too surprising given the Chinese refer to their country as "the Middle Kingdom" (Zhongguo). It's only natural that maps should reflect the perspective (thus knowledge AND bias) of their maker - history shows this. Until the discovery of the Americas, the "centre" of the world was routinely placed by Europeans where the centre of Eurasiafrica was estimated to lie, e.g. Ptolemy's Map.

By: derrida derider

derrida derider — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:20:48 +0000

I’ll bet Chinese and Japanese maps look like this one too.

By: Fyodor

Fyodor — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 22:49:37 +0000

Cam, There was nothing original or unusual about Wright placing Britain at the centre (and, strictly speaking, it's not at the centre) of a world map. The Dutch mapmakers (e.g. Ortelius, 1570) who dominated cartography in the 16th and 17th centuries placed Europe at the "centre" (at least, longitudinally) of the world after the discovery of the West coast of the Americas and the Pacific Ocean in the earlier part of the 16th century. Furthermore, Britain dominated neither cartography nor longitudinal calculation until the 18th century. Britain only became a major maritime power with its trade and naval ascendancy over the Dutch in the late 17th century, more than 50 years ater Wright published his map. As for the "political cringe" ignoring "the facts of modern trade and globalisation", the facts are that the Northern hemisphere dominates the global economy and seaborne trade. The major trade routes are across the North Atlantic and the North Pacific. No major trade routes run through Australia. Singapore has much greater claim to being at the centre of seaborne trade, as Australia is on the periphery of the growing Asian supereconomy, centred on China. Politically, militarily and economically, Australia is not pivotal; it is peripheral, and that's OK.

By: Jacques Chester

Jacques Chester — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 20:30:49 +0000

It’s funny that you should talk about Australia being at the centre of several major data routes, because right now I can’t actually get to a single site outside of Australia.

I’m guessing something’s wrong with my provider, because I know there are at least 5 submarine cables running out of the country which could carry international traffic.

Still. I’m annoyed.