Summing Up

I’m uncertain about how to sum up this course; we have covered many topics, some that I expected to be boring, that weren’t; and some that I expected to get a lot from, but haven’t.

This is the first course that I have done externally in ten years. I miss the classroom. I don’t think I have given the right amount of time to the right areas of emphasis. In a classroom teachers are able to guide their students, give verbal prompts that remind them of what’s important and where their focus should be. As I was re-reading the concepts of the course, I found myself at a bit of a loss, and I shouldn’t be – I’ve done the hours (albeit in spurts, but that’s largely out of my control).

So, as I look over the objectives of each topic, what have I learned?

I was able to realise the different forms that books may take, though I don’t believe I have come anywhere near a definitive definition of book. I hope that I can look at an object and identify ‘bookness’; or rather what ‘bookness’ is for me. I’m confident about my knowledge of manuscripts, illuminated or not. I found the subjects of that topic quite spectacular – it’s one of those topics where I learned more than I bargained for. One day, when my chicks have flown the coop, I’d like to see some, especially those whose colours and intensity I found mind-boggling when viewed via a monitor.

I have a fairly clear idea about what block books are; how they were made and why they were made that way. A couple of exceptions though: how are craftsmen able to use multiple blocks in a way that produces a cohesive whole image? And how were/are illustrations transferred to the blocks prior to carving? I asked those questions on my blog, and sincerely tried to find answers (within the confines of the WWW), but I only got inklings of possibilities. I regret that I didn’t look further into William Morris and the Kelmscott Press; as a graphic designer (in the making), it is an oversight I must definitely rectify.

I chose illustrated children's for the optional topic and Assessment One. In most of the books I came across it was obvious which were picture books and which were illustrated books. The history was extensive and I found identifying the important contributors to the genre difficult as there were so many. I spent a lot of time trying to find two appropriate examples of the same children’s illustrated books for the assessment. I scoured the local library's bookshelves and those of friends. I had several books sent from Wagga (expensive business, that), including Edward Lear’s Book of Nonsense, and delighted at the myriad styles of illustration from the web links provided for us and those I found myself. Illustration is a true Art form. I looked at many books but Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are astonished me the most because of the changes in the panels and the way they tied with the story. I read that book to my children and children I cared for, many times – and never noticed. Examining the relationship between author and illustrator difficult; there just didn't seem to be much information available.

Artist's books turned out to have a resonance with me, particularly work such as that produced by Ed Hutchins and Emily Martin. The work I have done with scrapbooks and other paper crafts over the years made the genre feel familiar. I would like to look into William Blake’s work and that done by other book artist’s more. Using the form of a book as a way to affect how content is read is something I don’t understand, except for blatant examples of form; like Linda Newbown’s Tennis Ball and I haven’t had the oppostunity to read that yet. I haven’t been able to fully determine quite what an artist’s book is or is not as yet; but I’d like to hope I’ll know one when I see one.

I understand hypertext and hypermedia and can see how they might be used by authors, book artist’s and artists, though I suspect that there are yet many ways they can be used that I have not yet encountered. Digital artist’s books are elusive. Except for one I was able to borrow from the University of Queensland’s library, and then could not use because my technology had surpassed that of the CD-ROM and wouldn’t work (my screen resolution couldn’t be set low enough!); I haven’t been able to find many that were free to view (Patternbook being a noteworthy and wonderful exception). Artist’s need to earn a living too, but as a student, I thinks I’ll have to wait awhile before much digital hypermedia is available to borrow form libraries.

I thoroughly enjoyed this course and got a lot from it. I would have gotten more if I had been better able to focus my learning. As I’m continuing distance education, I hope that’s not too long.

Digital Artist's Books

The Alphabet Julen

I enjoyed Julia Hayden’s Digital Alphabet. As a graphic-designer in-the-making, it provided some interesting perspectives of items that we see, sometimes innumerable times, over the course of our everyday lives. Don’t try and read Animals Can Be An Alphabet, Too on Mozilla, folks – it only works on IE: but it is most definitely worth it. Left alone the animal alphabet marches forward through each letter under its own stream; giving the viewer a length of time sufficient to admire Hayden’s creations. I did something similar in a graphic design subject, but I must admit – my designs are far less elegant.

Temptations

I enjoyed the images in this web site; I like the aesthetic of found images incorporated into hand-drawn art accompanying poems, but I do believe that the site functions more as an exhibition space than a book or books.

Transient Books, from which Temptations is sold has other artists books some of which are digital, such as the Janos Book. A site I believe I will look further into when I have time.

Minsky in Bed

I liked the concurrent stories with two voices in the stories in Minsky’s sexual (mis)adventures in Minsky in Bed

The Structure of the Virtual Book

Peregoy’s discussion about artist’s books raised some interesting points but was disappointing – the images he refers to (which can be seen above or below the corresponding text) are far too small to see when clicked on.

Treyf

His Excerpts from the Encyclopaedia of Underwater Investigations looked like an open traditional book with cover, title page and bibliographic information opposite the first page, but as a .pdf, the reader can only scroll down to the next spread which also looks like a traditional book spread. I was not particularly drawn to any of Rob Kovitz’s work.

Patternbook

Interesting: Hadlow at in the first part of the writing in the Patternbook says in regards to writing and drawing “Each involved an intimate and physical relationship between hand, pen and page (whether the page was part of a book or a wall)”. She provides yet another perspective about ‘bookness’, and what constitutes an artist’s book. A fascinating look into how the mind of an artist works. I wish I could see the completed work, though Hadlow might not like that term.

And to think Ruth was at CSU last year…

The Travel Poem

This .pdf is a poem by James Stuart. The Travel Poem have the look of a book but it does present double page spreads per view, so that the reader infers ‘book’. http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/publications/philament/issue8_pdf/STUART_travelpoem.pdf

Artist's Books - more questions

If “An artist book is an object that deals with or extends the function of a book” (my emphasis) then how can there be artist’s books online?

The functionality of a book pertains to its physicality; turning pages, a cover to protect it. My blog entry about my Issey Miyake book is now questionable. I didn’t consider the function of a book when designing it except as a mechanism whereby pages are turned to see new information. Is that enough consideration? Or is this 1995 quote dated? Perhaps its parameters are too confining, after all, the Book Arts Web members couldn’t come to an answer that all were happy with, (3 years after the aforementioned site) how are the rest of us supposed to?

Books in the Digital Era

Vannevar Bush

"Professionally our methods of transmitting and reviewing the results of research are generations old and by now are totally inadequate for their purpose. If the aggregate time spent in writing scholarly works and in reading them could be evaluated, the ratio between these amounts of time might well be startling. Those who conscientiously attempt to keep abreast of current thought, even in restricted fields, by close and continuous reading might well shy away from an examination calculated to show how much of the previous month's efforts could be produced on call. Mendel's concept of the laws of genetics was lost to the world for a generation because his publication did not reach the few who were capable of grasping and extending it; and this sort of catastrophe is undoubtedly being repeated all about us, as truly significant attainments become lost in the mass of the inconsequential."

This paragraph for me highlights one of the main benefits of our digital age. I believe though, that there is more work required in making World Wide Web secure before it can be used as a tool of storage and communication in areas sensitive to plagiarism and theft. Where does the intranet fit into the structure of the WWW? My husband works for the RAAF and can send some stuff off base. And what about the policing agencies, surely their matching and retrieving of fingerprints from “Codis” (too many CSI programs me thinks) are done using some sort of intra/inter net?

But I digress; after all we are looking at books in the digital age, not fingerprinting techniques or military secrets.

I love Bush’s idea of a “memex” (sections 6-8 on p.4 of the Atlantic document) , it has a Jules Verne feel to it. Bush was an incredible intellect, whose works for me are marred by his recommendation of the use of the atomic bomb.

Future

I couldn’t find a date of writing for Is it a Book - Future (except on the credits page where the authors announce their receipt of a 1998 award) but the authors mention the limitations inherent with computers; namely portability and electricity. If this page was written in 1998, it’s amazing to think that just 10 years later computers are portable and do not require a power source to be used – look at the latest Apple iPhone http://www.apple.com/mobileme/ or any other internet-enabled mobile phones: access your own files or browse the internet, just connect it to power so it can recharge when you get home. These arguments seem to hold little weight for people who can access these types of devices.

I can, in fact I’m waiting for a local mobile phone shop to get in an LG Renoir. For just $29 per month I get 20mb internet access and $170 worth of free calls. 3G have got a similar $19 plan – how easy and inexpensive are these things going to get? I’ll be able to access online university notes and books – a limited amount, sure, but quantity can be upgraded. And it’s considerably smaller that any book that I’ve seen and wanted to read.

Regarding the users of technological devices; my 72 year old father-in-law is learning to use a computer – he’s done a course aimed at aged pensioners, and with our children using computers from such an early age – pre-school in many cases – it won’t be long before any lagging baby-boomers and generation X individuals catch up.

Regarding the users of technological devices; my 72 year old father-in-law is learning to use a computer – he’s done a course aimed at aged pensioners, and with our children using computers from such an early age – pre-school in many cases – it won’t be long before any lagging baby-boomers and generation X individuals catch up.

But don’t misunderstand me. I’m a bibliophile, and while space and budget these days restrict my book purchases, I’m a regular at the council and university libraries – so are my husband and kids. It isn’t so long ago that I had difficulty reading from a monitor, I used to have to print out all my readings for uni courses and didn’t even think of reading a book online. Now I can, and do, but I can’t see a time when I can’t, or won’t want, to curl up in bed with a good book. They have a unique place in our culture regardless of genre or format.

Salon.com is a site, found through a link at the Is it a Book site has some interesting reads – essays about Stephen King’s e-book, a criticism of The Gutenberg Elegie and an essay about a digital reader Unfortunately these essays are out of date by eight years, and we know that’s a long time in the world of computers and computer-related technology, so I looked up a device that I think is similar to the one mentioned in The Digital Reader. The rest of the links (the ones that still work, anyway) are also worth following up; somewhat dated, but interesting.

Amazing Pop-Up Pull-Out Mummy Book

The following figures are from Assessment item 3 Pt. B #1 have been provided for closer examination.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Back cover

What is an Artist?

I’ve never seen myself as an artist. For one of my graphic design subjects we were asked to create graffiti while bearing in mind the implications of that genre. I stencilled a chimp barring his teeth in a scream and holding a globe of the world onto a 1250h x 350w mirror. It was a comment on man stuffing up the world – the chimp is laughing at us: he could have done a better job of looking after it.

I spent a huge amount of time on complicated stencils, and love the result, but if I think of it as Art I feel like a fraud, after all, I’m the person who used an enlarger projector in an illustration subject! I see my self as a crafter – I make greeting cards and scrapbook; and I’ve done paper sculpture and paper tole; cross stitch; knitting; and sewing amongst others.

My point is this: my graffiti piece meets the ‘content’, ‘human action’ and ‘appropriate form’ criteria of 'Art', but I didn’t make it with the intent of creating ‘Art’. To me it was ‘design’ . If the lecturer had decided to put the class’ work in the Gallop Gallery, would it have become ‘Art’ because of the context? I think of it as Art now, does that change what is was when I made it three years ago? Are the drawings from that illustration class ‘Art’ because they fit a pre-conceived definition of what Art is? One of them is a graphite pencil illustration of my son as a toddler, dripping wet with a hose in his hand (I used the enlarger to trace a photograph – cheating, I know). I love it, and so do other people. Another is of a friend’s young daughter kneeling on the ground in a tutu, taken from behind and above in a three-quarter profile. I did that one in coloured pencils, and other people love that one too. But I didn’t consider myself to be an artist when I made them; I struggled, did lots of trials and worked harder than in any subject I’d done before or since.

If my mirror and drawings end up being displayed in my home, like Art, what does that make that black and white photograph of a fish on a silver plater (it's bevel-mounted!), or the abstract design I did that ended up on a hand-made paper shopping bag? Even though all the pieces were created as a student and marked by a professional are the illustrations and mirror different from my fish or bag or even the scrapbook pages (and I have one of those in a frame on display) because of their ability to suit the context of ‘display on a wall’? I have framed several of my cross stitches and they’re hung on walls, does that convert them from Craft to Art?

Artists book(’)s (to quote the Book_Arts-L listserv) simply raised more questions for me, and as I read the entire listserv, it seems the same applies to people whom I assume to be far more knowledgeable and familiar with the topic than I.

From this:

1. “An artist’s book is a book made by an artist” (Donald Farren).

2. “A book whose whole entity is intended to be a work of art” (Karen Sanders).

3. “Physical or intellectual artefacts which are intended to be evaluated primarily by aesthetic, rather than utilitarian or cost criteria.” (Jane [last name unknown]

4. “Intent is everything. An Artists' book is different from other books simply because it conceived and executed from the beginning as a work of art by its creator. Nothing anyone thinks changes the original intent of the artist.” (Michael Morin)

5. “An "artist book" is an assemblage of folios, bound or otherwise, meant to be observed in a sequential fashion, either arbitrary or predetermined, and comprised of elements both textual, or pictorial. Construction is often of an importance equal to that of content. Modes of reproduction are variable, as are methods of construction.” (Michael Babcock)

6. "Artists book" is a [controversial term given to] book or book-like object in which the primary interest, or emphasis, is visual rather than textual.”

7. Artist book - A booklike structure of at least 100 pages, opened to approximately page 50, spread evenly with a gem from the recently opened can of worms and SLAMMED FORCEFULLY!!!!! until bits of gunk are evenly distributed over the book, the table, and the artist. (Preferrably within splatting distance of the urinal in the museum.) (Georgie McNeese)

To this:

“Many people, schooled and otherwise, have this hangup about "Art" and "Artists". Duchamp's urinal, mentioned earlier, proved once and for all, that art is whatever we want it to be; that any work (object, composition, dance, thought, etc) in the right situation or context (time and space) *can* be considered to transcend its fellows (other urinals, for example), or simply be sublime in its own right, and be "Art". If only one person considers it to be Art, then -- for that person -- it *is* Art, and if that person can convince sufficient others then for *all* of them it is Art. Obviously, if no one considers it Art, then it isn't.

Further, art is generally considered to be works such as painting, sculpture, musical compositions, dance, etc, therefore those who create such works are artists. If I paint, I am an artist. If I call myself an artist, no one can say with certainty otherwise. They may say I am not a good artist but that is only their opinion. If five people think I am a good artist, and five people think I'm not, then what am I? It depends upon whom you ask. Those painters who are considered to be great artists convinced sufficient others (through words or work) to be thought so. Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema used to be considered a great artist: today, most people haven't heard of him and of those who have, most consider him to have been not so great. Europe used to be almost crowded with court painters, musicians, etc, who were in their time, celebrated: today they are forgotten except by a few dusty scholars. Times change, tastes change, circumstances change; and life goes on.

The long and the short of all this is that if Mary Smith calls herslf an artist, and makes what she calls artists books (with or without the apostrophe), then who is to say otherwise. Some will, of course, say she is not, or her works are not art but might be craft, or whatever, but to her friends, family, acquaintances, and maybe even some critics (remember, everyone's a critic) she is considered an Artist and what she does is considered Art. Only time will tell if it really is art, and for how long it will remain so.” (Richard Miller)

I like the way definition #6 is heading in terms of the visual being of primary interest, but it is incomplete. Books such as Window by Jeanne Baker and Green Air by Jill Morris and Lindsay Muir are created by using photographs of original artwork to illustrate the pages. Baker’s pages don’t have any text and while Morris’s do, the focus of the pages are most definitely the illustrations; but neither book could be considered to be an artist’s book.

Another thing to consider in this definition is the structure of books. Both Ed Hutchins and Emily Martin are book artists, yet the many of their works could not be described as ‘book’ or ‘book-like’. Hutchins’ Words for the World and Martin’s Vicious Circle #6 are two such examples.

One of the artist’s books I found in my research defies all the descriptions I have quoted so far: The Reál: Las Vegas, Nevada (Taylor, Mark, C. and Marquez, Jose Publisher [United States]: Williams College Museum of Art; Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art [MASS MoCA], 1997.) is digital (A synopsis can be found here.)

By an interesting twist of fate, I found that one of the authors had participated in the Book_Arts-L listserv discussion. He had this to say (without alteration):

“I thought I'd say something about "electronic artists books" since that category has all *three* points of contention.

Last year, an artist-writer and a philosopher made a CD-ROM and called it an artists book. Apparently, it's so because then a museum published it and a big University press released it.

Since I'm one of those two crooks (the artist-writer), the recent debate on this list is pretty amusing. I mean, after the CD-ROM was done, I went out and got a press and started laying down type.

There is no trajectory as to what must happen in the future of books, nor are there absolute boundaries in art.

Personally, I feel that when I can put a small animation on a piece of paper or play a sound at the turn of a page, there won't be a need for CD-ROMs -- far cheaper to produce than die-cut jobs and offset printing, btw. It's also good to consider that books are often made to *communicate with other people.* I chose a CD-ROM over a more precious book form because I wanted to reach a large number of people, affordably, *and* I wanted to force people to use their computer for something else than looking at sports stats, stock reports, psycho gunmen games and porn.” (Jose Marquez)

The listserv discussion was in March 1998. I wonder if the people who posted on it would revise their opinions today.

From Scroll to Codex

The following are two excerpts from the Book_Arts-L listserv “Definition of the Artist's Book; What is a Book; BSO's (Book Shaped Objects); Art vs. Craft” A Discussion held March 1998.

I have copied them here (without alteration) because they are related directly to one of ART317’s topics (topic 1) from earlier this semester and they’re an interesting read.

"Thinking About Scrolls
So, next month there will be a solo show of my books at UCLA called "Toying With Books: Playing With Conventions". I'm working on the catalog for it and I'm very excited about how it is developing. When you open the cover so it lies flat, then start pushing it towards the center, the pages start advancing one at a time. It's really nifty. And, since is has covers and the dozen individual pages are attached to one side, I guess it fits most people's definition of a book. I got the idea from a 1954 manual by Victor Strauss called "Point of Purchase Cardboard Displays". I figured I was taking a 1950's idea and updating it to the 1990's. But I was surprised when I recently showed the model to a group of colleagues. One of them, Nancy Tomasko, immediately recognized a connection between my structure and an ancient Chinese scroll. Whoa! I thought to myself, a Chinese scroll? I don't think so. The next time the group got together, Nancy presented me with a file of documentation on a particular type of Chinese scroll called a "whirlwind binding". For this type of binding, anywhere from eight to 24 additional leaves are attached to the surface of the scroll. Each sheet is indented from the previous one for easy access. What a great idea: a scroll with pages! When it was used around the 9th century, it was a very acceptable type of book. I had never seen this structure before, yet there was a definite connection between it and the 20th century book I was producing. The point I'm trying to make is that all of us who love books are operating on an historical continuum. The structure that we call a book has changed drastically from what it was in the past, and it will change drastically in the future. Other subscribers have pointed out that our word "book" pre-dates the codex, our word "library" predates the introduction of papyrus, and Richard Miller cleverly alluded to "volume" being derived from "roll", as in a scroll. Rather than being locked in time, I've found it productive to be aware of historical models and to embrace them in my development as a book artist. It's not an either/or situation. There's room on my library shelves for all kinds of books. I feel that my life and my library have both been enriched by a broad definition of what constitutes a book. Thanks to Nancy Tomasko, I am posting a selection from "The Story of Chinese Books". It traces the development of the book in China from a scroll to a sutra binding (what today we call a concertina binding) to what we now call a codex. Notice that the author identifies a modified sutra binding as a "whirlwind binding". We're not the only ones who have had trouble agreeing on definitions! For those who are interested in a further discussion of scrolls, I invite you to visit my web page. Under the heading "What is a Book?" there is an essay I originally posted to the Book Arts List on October 5, 1996 called "Is the Scroll a Book?". It a further elaboration of my continuing fascination with this ancient book structure.
Ed (Hutchins)"

"From Scrolls to Leaves
The period of the Sui and Tang dynasties, when hand copying flourished, was also the period when the scroll and rod system reached its height and when beautiful bindings appeared. In the mid-9th century, however, books in scroll form were gradually replaced by books in leaf form. The scrolls were long--often several tens of feet--and rather troublesome to unroll. The process of looking up a single sentence in the text might require the unrolling of most of a scroll. During the Warring States Period and the Qin and Han dynasties scrolls caused few problems because there were few lengthy writings. But from the Sui and Tang dynasties onward, after a number of dictionaries had been published, the matter of looking up a word or a sentence was an oft-occurring necessity. The great inconvenience and inefficiency of rolling and unrolling became more and more of a problem. Some inventive person then decided that, instead of using the scroll form, a book might be made by folding the paper to form a pile in a rectangular shape. The front and back covers of such a book were made of strong, thick paper, sometimes dyed in colour or mounted on cloth for protection. This new form was called a "leaf binding", or "sutra binding". With this new kind of binding, a reader could easily turn to any leaf to look up a word or a sentence, without having to unroll the whole book. This was a great step forward in the development of books. Before long, however, this new form was also found to have some drawbacks. A long piece of folded paper could easily become unfolded and spread out. To avoid this, book makers added another sheet of paper to the folded pile. This was creased in the middle and one half of the sheet was pasted onto the first leaf and the other half was pasted onto the last leaf. The extra sheet held the pile together and prevented it from spreading out, while the leaves of the pile could still be turned forwards and backwards. (This came to be called a "whirlwind binding".) These two forms of binding appeared in the mid-9th century. They overcame the defects of the scroll and rod system, yet they had a disadvantage in the fact that the place where the paper was folded might break after a lapse of time. Disarrangement and loss of leaves then occurred unavoidably. The next step was to bind the separate sheets into a book. When this step was taken books bound as they are today were created.

The Story of Chinese Books, written by Liu Guojun and Zheng Rusi, translated by Zhou Yicheng. Foreign Languages Press, Beijing, 1985.
Ed (Hutchins)
QUEERBOOKS"