proposition 2

and a North arrow are also part of such maps. But,
the map does not contain the two people searching
their way and having a drink. The map disregards
all the possible reasons summed up earlier why
the two choose exactly that spot on the Place de
l’église. All the sudden, the map only indicates the
spatial, materialised parts and tends to dismiss
the people making -and using the square. Daily life
does not seem to take part on the map. Where did
that part go? Is someone taking care of it? Who is
interested in daily life realities? Someone with an
anthropological orientation would take place on
the square and observe, participate, bring themself
among the people and tries to gain experiences
there themselves, explore the surrounding, its use
and has informal conversations with the two people
searching the way or having a drink for example. (3)
They would take their notebook and intensively try
to describe what happens. They write, a lot. And
sometimes, among other documentation, a little
sketch accompanies their words. (4) These words
mostly demand to get acquainted with the field in
a linear way as you habitually start on the top left
and end on the bottom right of a page. Back to
the map of the square, where to start reading it?
Where do you end? Which part takes more time
to understand? Maps are made according to a
different set of conventions as writing such as