[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [BKARTS] bookart



I'm sure a sculptor would take offense to that statement.
I would argue that a sculpture also displays a content greater than (more complex, deeper meaning, more significance, greater analytical thought) its structure.
Take Rodin's The Burghers of Calais? That is a sculpture that speaks volumes and is not necessarily a monument to structure.
What you are saying is that a book is a container that holds a text - true enough. However, whether or not this book-as-box has a lid and you can 'look inside' shouldn't limit what a 'book' is. This codex orientated definition of what a book is or isn't does (as someone has said previously on this thread) deny a large part of the history of books - their cultural function and significance etc.

Also, as far as am empty book not having the qualities of 'being a book' until something is put in it -
I have heard of blank books being used in rituals in various religious ceremonies - a blank bible. It is not necessary to have the word written when the book is obviously a bible and it is commited to the memory and souls of those worshippers. This book is not 'empty' just because no ink has been applied to the pages.

Also, I would ask, how is Minsky's book not 'readable'? Is it not a text? Does it not communicate thoughts/ideas?

Why must we narrow the definition of what a book is like some band of boring bibliophilic fascists. We're going to take all the fun out of it.


Andrew Williams
Pickafight Books
Stanmore NSW Australia.


> Michael Andrews <apeiron@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> A book is an object that, when opened, displays a content greater than 
> (more 
> complex, deeper meaning, more significance, greater analytical thought) 
> than 
> its structure. Otherwise it is sculpture, meant to convey its message 
> only 
> as structure.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Søren Ibsen" <soren.ibsen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 2:24 PM
> Subject: Re: bookart
> 
> 
> I have now read Philip Smiths and Ed Hutchins comments and also some of 
> the
> discussions which was going on ten years ago, and also the newly inputs.
> Very good.
> I agree with Ed that scrolls also have bookness,  ( I can't translate 
> that
> word in Norwegian).  A wonderfull book sculpture is the censored book I 
> saw
> on Minskys webside.  Because the book can't be read it has lost its
> bookness,  it is a censored book.  I will still not call it bookart.
> Philip Smith also creates booksculptures,  where it is possible to turn
> over the leaves, it is bookart.
> Books with emty leaves will have bookness when  you start  to create
> writings, drawings aso.
> My understanding is that it must be possible to open and se the contents 
> in
> the book before it can be called bookart.
> 
> Søren
> 
> 
> 
> 
>              ***********************************************
>      Visit "The Book of Origins: A survey of American Fine Binding"
>                 Online exhibit and catalog order form at
>        <http://library.syr.edu/digital/exhibits/b/bookoforigins/>
> 
>              For all your subscription questions, go to the
>                       Book_Arts-L FAQ and Archive.
>           See <http://www.philobiblon.com> for full information
>              ***********************************************
> 
>              ***********************************************
>      Visit "The Book of Origins: A survey of American Fine Binding"
>                 Online exhibit and catalog order form at
>        <http://library.syr.edu/digital/exhibits/b/bookoforigins/>
>                                     
>              For all your subscription questions, go to the
>                       Book_Arts-L FAQ and Archive.
>           See <http://www.philobiblon.com> for full information
>              ***********************************************


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]