Abstract

This paper calls for a genuine dialogue between geolocated and dislocated cartographies, between Euclidean and coordinates free maps, between conventional and alternative mapping practices. This dialogue was made necessary by the challenges faced by mapping rich, complex and sometimes extremely difficult stories: the life stories of Rwandan exiles. By mapping two of these stories using both a geolocated mapping tool (i.e. Atlascine) and a dislocated mapping approach (i.e. sensibility mapping) we reflect on their respective potential and limits. Both approaches work well together due to their common respect for the integrity of the stories, and commitment to making the mapping process as transparent as possible. However, using them in parallel also unveils their differences and their complementarity. Geolocated maps tend to perform stories as geographic databases. They focus on what is explicit, geolocatable, on what is expressed, on the textual surface, on these stories’ skins. On the other hand, sensibility mapping performs the text as an entry point to the inner parts of these stories. Freed from any Euclidean constraints, sensibility maps engage more deeply with the intimate and personal dimensions of these stories, with what the storyteller might try to express despite the difficulty of verbalizing it, with their guts. The dialogue between both cartographic approaches highlights the vital complementarity of these approaches to map not only what is said in the lines of these stories, but what is also hidden between these lines.