>> Diploma Thesis (2005)

Title: Aesthetical Assessment of the Czech Cartographic Production For Schools

Supervisor: Univ. prof. dr. Vít Voženílek
Consultants: Univ. prof. dr. Vlastimil Zuska and Univ. prof. Ing. František Miklošík, DSc.
Opponent: Assoc. prof. dr.Milan V. Drápela

Motto: »…the aesthetic, aesthetic standpoint, aesthetic function ceaselessly permeate life, in the context of life there is no place onto which aesthetic function couldn’t project. The aesthetic is not a mere spume, a mere parallel to life, but an important aspect of all the life events.«

JAN MUKAŘOVSKÝ

Abstract:

Firstly, the thesis explores the connection between aesthetics and cartography as two scientific disciplines of dissimilar characters and strives to explain certain aesthetic concepts and compare the process of communication between users and cartographic works to the aesthetical process.
The subsequent part of the thesis focuses on evaluation of cartographic works from the aesthetic point of view. At this point, the new concept of “user friendliness” is introduced and justified by the differences between the aesthetic ideal of a cartographic work and the ideal of a user-friendly cartographic work.
Frequently examined characteristics of cartographic works, such as readability, lucidity and plasticity, are a part of this user friendliness. A proposed methodology for ensuring objectiveness of evaluation from the perspective of aesthetics and user friendliness is included in this section.
This is followed by a proposal of the evaluation methodology and procedure, the latter being based on the principles of the aesthetical process. To facilitate quantification of evaluation, a number of individual evaluation criteria must be used at the beginning to obtain higher-order criteria values by calculating the mean values of the individual criteria; the final percentage values express to what degree the examined characteristics of the work have been met.
Finally, the findings referred to above are applied in evaluation of two current school atlases of the world produced by SHOCart and Kartografie Praha. A survey of atlas users is included as one of the important parts of the evaluation.
The thesis includes tables with the individual evaluation criteria and images of map samples from the evaluated atlases for illustration.

Extent: 135 pages, 28 figures, 32 tables, 2 appendix, 50 links to literature and other sources.

Content:

1
 INTRODUCTION, OBJECTIVES AND PROCESSING PROCEDURE
 7
1.1  Introduction 7
1.2  Aims of thesis 8
1.2.1  General aim 8
1.2.2  Secondary aims 8
1.2.3  Hypotheses 9
1.3  Stages and processing procedure 9
2  INTRODUCTION TO AESTHETICAL RESEARCH OF CARTOGRAPHIC WORKS
 11
2.1  Interdisciplinary aspects of research on aesthetics of cartographic works 11
2.2  Terminology of research on aesthetics of cartographic works 12
2.3  Elements of aesthetics and assessment theory 13
2.3.1  General terms 13
2.3.2  Aesthetical process 15
2.3.3  Aesthetical assessment 17
2.3.4  Aspects of aesthetical attitude 20
3  PROBLEMS IN EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHY 23
3.1  Cartographic bibliography and sources – view of cartographer 23
3.2  Bibliography and sources on aesthetics, assessment and history 31
4  METHODOLOGY AND FIRST STAGE OF RESEARCH ON AESTHETICS OF CARTOGRAPHIC WORKS 36
4.1  Searching for methods suitable for aesthetical assessment 36
4.2  Using knowledge from art theory in cartography
 37
4.3  Methods of assessment objectification 39
4.4  Important methods used for assessment of cartographic works in terms of aesthetics 41
4.5  First stage of research on aesthetics of cartographic works, or theoretical basis 41
4.5.1  User-friendliness 42
4.5.2  Other sets of functions of cartographic works 43
4.5.3  Differences between aesthetical and practical approach 44
4.5.4  “Errors” in cartography 46
5  PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING CARTOGRAPHIC WORKS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THEIR AESTHETICS AND USER-FRIENDLINESS 50
5.1  General principles for setting criteria 51
5.2  Abstract aims of assessment 52
5.3  Assessment scales
52
5.4  Assessment procedure from the point of view of aesthetics and user-friendliness
 54
5.4.1  Study of preliminary parameters, analysis of prerequisites, hypotheses 54
5.4.2  First contact with the work, primary perceptive attractiveness 55
5.4.3  Overall perception of the work, pre-assessment of the work as a whole during aesthetic reception 56
5.4.4  Close study of the non-cartographic contents of the work 57
5.4.5  Close study of cartographic contents of the work (individual maps…) 58
5.4.6  Concretization of assessed objects during closer study of cartographic contents 69
5.4.7  Specifics of the digital works assessment 70
5.4.8  Comparison 71
5.4.9  Other assessment procedures 72
5.4.10  Complex judgement 73
5.5  Factors influencing aesthetics and user-friendliness of cartographic works 73
5.5.1  Characteristic of the author (creator) 73
5.5.2  Means of representation (sensory material) of not only cartographic works 76
5.5.3  The surrounding 79
6  ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT CZECH SCHOOL ATLASES (PRACTICAL PART OF THESIS) 82
6.1  Specificity of the school (world) atlases
 82
6.2  Introduction of assessed school world atlases and their creators 83
6.2.1  School atlas of cartographic company SHOCart, Ltd. 83
6.2.2  School atlas of cartographic company Kartografie Praha, Corp. 84
6.3  First stage of assessment 85
6.3.1  Study of preliminary parameters etc., determining criteria weight 85
6.3.2  First contact with the work, primary perceptive attractiveness 88
6.3.3  Overall perception of the work, pre-assessment of the work as a whole during aesthetic reception 90
6.3.4  Close study of the non-cartographic contents of the work 92
6.3.5  Close study of cartographic contents of the work (individual maps…) 94
6.3.5.1  Examples of general geography maps 95
6.3.5.2  Examples of political maps 97
6.3.5.3  Examples of industry maps of continents 98
6.3.5.4  Examples of other thematic maps of continents
  100
6.3.5.5  Examples of world thematic maps of area character  102
6.3.5.6  Examples of world thematic maps of choropleth character  103
6.3.5.7  Examples of specialty in atlases  105
6.3.6  Comparison of the atlases  105
6.4  Second stage of assessment – field research
  111
6.4.1  Research progress  111
6.4.2  Results and research evaluation  115
6.5  Assessment conclusion - summary  115
6.5.1  Transformation of values of the fulfilment of basic criteria of the assessed atlases  115
6.5.2  Conclusion of assessment  116
7  DISCUSSION  118
8  CONCLUSION  120
   ACCOUNT OF SHORTCUTS  123
   ACCOUNT OF TABLES, FIGURES AND BOXES 125
   ACCOUNT OF BIBLIOGRAPHY AND OTHER SOURCES 128
   ACCOUNT OF APPENDIX 131
   Abstract in Czech and English language 134
   Bibliographical identification 135