[Table of Contents] [Search]


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

Re: [BKARTS] bookart



Hey Gerald

Fancy meeting you here.

You are ever so right. No doubt the instigators of the printing press had no more idea of the cultural impact they were implementing than the early inventors of the web did.

The Church, just like the corporate and oligarchic backers of the web, probably were thinking that they were funding a useful means of mind control, when in fact they were making it possible for Moby Dick and The Stranger. Free thinking reared its ugly head, oh my. 

But you hit the proverbial nail on the metaphoric head with idea that the notion of reading then is not the notion of reading now.
No telling how those pesky notions will alter in the face of electronic media. And that bears some scrutiiny.

But it is not the forcing of contemporary values as anachronisms that is at issue, it is the historical record of media change and its cultural impact that needs to be understood.
There is something to be gained from that or we wouldn't be having such issues under so much discussion.

See you in the hood.

michael



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gerald Lange" <Bieler@xxxxxxx>
To: <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: bookart


> Michael
> 
> From what I think I know about it, the printing press was not 
> considered revolutionary in its time. Revolutionary was not tolerated 
> (or even a concept) in the mid 15th century. And since the Church funded 
> the idea/enterprise, hardly so. Nope, no Moby Dick, agreed. No novels 
> then. Might be worth exploring the notion of what reading meant then as 
> compared to now. It never pays to force our values onto our 
> interpretation of the past. There is no knowledge to be gained from that.
> 
> Gerald
> http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
> 
>> And, lest we forget, the printing press was at one time
>> just such a revolutionary media advancement.
>>
>> No doubt there were folks who claimed
>> to prefer a good old fashioned scribe written book.
>> Who wouldn't? But you have admit that if it were not
>> for the printing press most of us today would not know a book
>> from a pitchfork. We simply would have no access to scribe written
>> tomes of any interest. If, that is, we actually knew how to read.
>>
>> And I'll bet that regularity of typography
>> and lack of illumination
>> gave some sensitive folks a migraine headache
>> and they had to confine their reading to quill lettering,
>> vellum and the censorship of the Church's
>> mind police. I can't imagine Moby Dick
>> being copied out in some religious scriptorium.
> 
>             ***********************************************
>     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]