 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
book n. Abbr. b., B., bk.1. A volume made up of written or printed pages fastened along one side and encased between protective covers.2. Any written or printed literary work. 3. A bound volume of blank or ruled pages. 4. Plural. Volumes that are mysterious, filled with wisdom and wonders just waiting to be read. | |
Thinking About Books |
||
 |
"A book is something you pick up and read." Richard Seibert "What is a book? A series of little
printed signs--essentially only that. It is for the reader to supply
himself the forms and colors and sentiments to which these signs correspond.
It will depend on him whether the book be dull or brilliant, hot with
passion or cold as ice. Or, if you prefer to put it otherwise, each
word in a book is a magic finger that sets a fiber of our brain vibrating
like a harp-string, and so evokes a note from the sounding- board of
our soul. No matter how skillful, how inspired, the artist's hand; the
sound it wakes depends on the quality of the strings within ourselves."
"...All that mankind has done,
thought, gained or been...is lying as in magic preservation in the pages
of books."
"In a book the artist controls
the combinations and ordering of different bits of information."
"Paper will stand anything you
write on it." "In theory, there are no limits upon the kinds of materials that can be put between covers, or how those materials can be arranged." Richard Kostelanetz
"Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it."
PJ O'Rourke
"When you sell a man a book
you don't just sell him 12 ounces of paper and ink and glue. You sell
him a whole new life." "What an author likes to write most is his signature on |
|
 |
We generally credit Gutenberg
with the original mass-produced book. If Gutenberg were to come back today,
there is little that he would recognize. He would not be familiar with computers,
airplanes, skyscrapers, current fashions, or most of the food we eat. But
he would recognize a conventional book. It's one of the few things in over
500 years that's remained relatively unchanged.
As book artists strike out in new directions to explore, expand and redefine what a book is, the challenge is to create a definition that encompasses the wide range and interests of the book arts. The easy definition is this: "A book is what a bookmaker makes." But that doesn't tell us much. When I defined books for myself, I chose not to look at what a book is, what it is made out of, or what it looks like. Instead, I chose to consider how a book is used and what purpose it serves. For me, a book is "a structure for storing and sharing information." I recognize that for a majority of people it is too broad and does not meet their needs. Several years ago I told this definition to an audience and someone exclaimed, "But, that describes a refrigerator." I replied, "Wow! What a great idea for a book." Many people have tried to arrive at a definition on which everyone can agree. Sigh, it's not going to happen. But it is possible to find common ground on which to discuss books. Philip Smith gives a framework by suggesting that we should look at what gives an object "bookness". In other words, instead of saying, "a "book" IS this AND this AND this AND this," maybe we should be saying, "bookness" CONSISTS of this OR this OR this OR this." Some things that may constitute bookness are: pages, covers, binding, sequence, narration, illustration, table of contents, durability, portability, shape, purpose, meaning, use, acceptance, ISBN number, book-shelve-ability, etc. The more of these characteristics a book has, the more we can say it has bookness. This framework helps define and explain why some objects like a dodecahedron and a pack of cards can have bookness sometimes and not all the time. Is this web site a book? Well, it certainly has a lot of bookness to it. It has text, illustrations, pages, it stores and shares information, and it certainly reaches a lot of people. However, for me, it's the structure of the electronic container that leaves me cold. I want something visually interesting and stimulating that I can touch and handle. The Electronic Age opens new doors. But it's the loss of the tactile feel of a tangible object that I miss. While computer whizzes and forward-thinking visionaries are soaring into flights of virtual reality, I'm happy to remain behind wallowing in the pleasure of cradling a physical object in my hand and savoring the anticipation of turning the next page. Adapted from postings by Edward Hutchins to the Book Arts List, April 8, 1995 and October 5, 1996 |
|
 |
Not everyone will choreograph
a great ballet. Not everyone will hit a homerun. But everyone has a story
to tell and that is why everyone is a potential book maker.
The problem is that everyone has a different story and a different set of interests, abilities and experience. As a result, there has to be a wide variety of ways and methods to record and preserve these stories. One structure does not meet everyone's need. Therefore, we need shape books, counting books, puppet books, unfolding star books, journals, diaries, action books, books with pockets, tunnel books, collage books, single-sheet structures, non-adhesive bindings, slab books, stab books, rotating wheel books, Egyptian name scrolls, Pre-Columbian time lines, cloth books, dos-a-dos bindings, and the ever ubiquitous: codex. My definition of a book includes all of these structures. Recently I worked with second graders making "castle" books. This structure has side towers that hinge open to reveal the rooms of the castle and a drawbridge that unfolds several times to provide space for writing a story. The students went wild creating throne rooms, great halls, kitchens, pantries, armories, counting rooms, stables, wine cellars, dungeons, libraries, chapels, bedrooms, smittys, wardrooms, treasure rooms, storage rooms and even a scriptorium. There were queens, kings, knights, knaves, scullery wenches, ghosts, banners, piles of armor, treasure chests, public hangings and hidden stairways. These kids had been studying castles for a month. Now, because of the book arts program and this unusual structure, they were downloading everything they had learned to record and preserve it. What more can you ask of a book? Some curmudgeons may dismiss book artists and say that what we produce are not books. Entrenched librarians may argue that the codex is the beginning and ending of what constitutes a book. But it gives me a lot of pleasure to say "Phooey!" There is an alternative way of looking at books and the vast majority of people are willing, eager for, and comfortable with a broader definition of what a book is. It isn't a question of right or wrong. It's a matter of what exists and to what extent they are going to be accommodated. In short, alternative book structures are here, they may be queer, but we'd better start finding space on our bookshelves for them. Originally posted by Edward Hutchins to the Book Arts List, April 11, 1995 |
|
 |
Philip Smith has said, "the
term (bookness) should not strictly speaking include pre- codex carriers
of text such as the scroll..."
Poor scrolls. They are always getting shabby treatment when it comes to defining and discussing books. They remind me of the hard working spouse that gets cast aside for a much-younger, trimmer model. Where would codices be without scrolls??!! I am always surprised when people are quick to see bookness in a wide variety of book structures, even concertina books, but fail to see much of it in scrolls. After all, a concertina book is a scroll that has been folded instead of rolled. Do folds make the books? Scrolls were books long before anyone thought about codices. For the librarians in ancient Alexandria who daily took scrolls off the shelf and then replaced them, they were books. The "books" that were chosen to become the Bible were scrolls, not codices. The Torah always has been and always will be a scroll. In 350 C.E. there were 28 public libraries in Rome and all they had were scrolls. The first publisher whose name we know, Atticus, published Cicero's books and many others as scrolls. There is a letter from Cicero to Atticus asking the publisher to correct a mistake that the author had made before the books were sent out. There are some problems even the codex couldn't correct! The information contained in scrolls did not run the entire length. Instead, it was divided into columns or "pages". Aside from convenience, whether the pages are strung out the length of a scroll, folded back and forth into a concertina, or cut apart for a codex, it seems to me that they serve pretty much the same purpose. Besides being easier to read, what qualities of bookness does a codex have that a scroll lacks? Some people say that a scroll is a scroll and a book is a codex. I think it is more accurate to say that a scroll is a scroll, a codex is a codex, and they both have a lot of bookness to them. Originally posted by Edward Hutchins to the Book Arts List, October 5, 1996 |
| ©1998-2004
|
