Conclusion
We have focused on a few specific examples of geospatial art-creation in this module, to showcase some of the convergences of geography, arts, and humanities in the context of geospatial art-creation. Of course, the illustrative possibilities go far beyond what we have featured in this module and we invite you to explore more on your own. Consider, for example, other geohumanities collaborations like GeoSpatial Sculpture (Heidkamp & Slomba, 2017), mapping and building landscapes of literary fiction and “fictional data” (Ridanpää, 2018; Cooper and Gregory, 2011), “queerying” public art in digitally networked space (Zebracki, 2017) or geohumanities projects that investigate the “sublime aesthetics” and wonderment of geomorphology (Dixon, Hawkins, and Straughan, 2013).
To summarize, this module has shown how the spatial, creative, affective, scientific, historical, material, and digital converge in co-constitutive, challenging, and enriching ways that produce new kinds of spatial imaginaries. This leads to many new questions for the spatial humanities, perhaps most the obvious of all being:
Where might geospatial art-creation go from here, and how will the spatial humanities be transformed the process?