size: each rectangle is an A2 piece of paper 594 x 420 mm. The overall drawing (5.46 x 3.56 m) consists of 48 sheets of A2 paper (12m 2 )
diminish this relationship: one must accept that you do not understand, but still want to know. Only then will you find ineffable beauty, because you were not looking for an image you already knew. If you are truly engaged, you will come upon things you had no idea existed, things truly new, not something understood. My thesis investigated the organic parts of inner Paris where the city seems to spontaneously spring new connections, the rational structured grid of most of Manhattan, and the threshold between the massive and the petit of Moscow. Does the more clear structure of Manhattan lead to more clear perception of oneself? Does the entangled structure of inner Paris cause you to run into dead ends, or even open ends where you get lost? Or will the mind always find a way to connect the dots, and build new linkages, just as the mind is able to distort the grid and transform the structure put in front of it, by looking at it very closely. My drawing of Aarhus is so large because if it were any smaller, if I had an overview while drawing the drawing, I would just have drawn the image of Aarhus as I know it from maps. By making the scale the point where I needed to get into the streets in my mind, I drew the feeling of Aarhus; I sensed Aarhus as my inner geography.
by redrawing the map based on his own reading of the space, Troel’s individual experience and interpretation is more legible through the contrast. Slight or significant deviations from the ‘authentic’ map illustrate the individual’s habits within, and perception of familiar spaces. As another reference, Careri’s Walkscapes is a beautiful book on walking as a critical tool/way of looking at the landscape. L D: Although I don’t see how this map embodies the feelings or personal geography of the author, I find the drawing quite beautiful in itself. I don’t know what Aarhus looks like on a map but despite this stated intent,
it still looks to me like the author was trying to recreate a ‘proper’ map, rather than an illustration of his subjective impression of the city – which is what I expected after reading the text. As I understand it, the drawing is not a diagram intended to better illustrate the message of the text, but is actually the stimulus for the text. After looking at the drawing again after 3 years, does he still feel it is an accurate representation of his city? Much as I am interested in a more general overall consideration of the connection between street layout and human psychology (both how/ why the space was created in its particular shape
69
in the first place, as well as what effect the space has on its users/ visitors once established) I would like to hear someone else’s thoughts on this, because I feel there to be somewhat of a disconnect between text and image which has not been explained.
T S H: I am a bit overwhelmed by the
interest and care you have all shown in this piece, , so thank you all very much, it has touched me deeply... (Troels’s further discussion is on the webpage for this issue: www.onsitereview.ca/33land
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator