[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Derivation and "giving credit"
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
- Subject: Re: Derivation and "giving credit"
- From: gary frost <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:01:36 -0600
- Message-Id: <199803171654.IAA10332@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.edu>
- Organization: dry frio bindery
- Sender: "Book_Arts-L: The list for all the book arts!" <BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
On Mon, 16 Mar 01998, Peter Verheyen wrote:
"One question I have is how unique are many of the structures we all
use? On some level aren't they all derivative, whether its a sewing
pattern, tunnel-book, board attachment."
I agree that the book arts are predominately derivative and that the
most innovative practitioners are those skilled at interpreting &
re-presenting the traditional resources. Same thing to some extent in
music. This is not news, but it is an interesting paradox.
In the book arts we attribute methods to a remote source and we
attribute ideas that we like to others. This is an old tactic, expanding
the base for the action. The important thing to remember is that each
advocacy or acknowledgement is actually a report of some personal