The ISCL (International Society of Contemporary Labyrinthology) has just released its annual compendium of labyrinthological statistics. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the almanac, it is a chronicle published on December 20th of every year containing myriad facts, observations, and findings which endeavor to provide labyrinthians with something of an unbiased (though, in recent years the partisanship of the ISCL has been increasingly scrutinized by various labyrinthological factions) "state of affairs" with regard to all ISCL registered labyrinths and navigators. We here at CLP, as might be expected from a group of primarily New Exteriorist labyrinthians, tend to be most interested in the stats which pertain to navigational tendencies, rather than quantalogical intelligence. Here are a couple particularly interesting findings, broken down by continent, and some interesting observations that I've been pondering. Thoughts/interpretations are, as always, welcomed and encouraged.
Documented Occurrences of Misnav (misanthropic navigation):
Europe: 43
N. America: 36
Australia: 34
Asia: 31
Antarctica: 28
S. America: 17
Africa: 14
Consider this: Australia has only 5 ISCL accredited labyrinths. That misnav number is very high indeed. This is fairly alarming.
Documented Second Center Fatalities:
Asia: 23
Antarctica: 19
Europe: 15
Australia: 12
Africa: 9
S. America: 7
N. America: 3
Consider this: 1) Antarctica has only 2 registered labyrinths, both constructed by the late Belarusian labyrinth architect Mezin Kobrin. 2) Instances of SN in N. America have nearly tripled since last year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
My aunt and uncle live in Canberra. I'll definitely tell them to avoid Australian labyrinths. Those misnav stats are frightening.
Alex: These statistics are indeed causing much consternation. When I was studying the numbers, I was most alarmed by the nature of the documented cases of misnav. We now have to think back on the days of basic misnav with fondness; gone are the times when navigators altered a labyrinth because he or she deemed the labyrinth too simple. We are forced to witness the growing instances of pathological misnav: deliberate, arbitrary alterations of the labyrinth for no apparent reason.
It is no surprise that ethico-labyrinthism was the focus of so much scholarship in 2008.
Post a Comment