[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Permanence in General (Was: Inkjet Printer Updates Wanted)
- To: Multiple recipients of list BOOK_ARTS-L <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Permanence in General (Was: Inkjet Printer Updates Wanted)
- From: Richard Miller <rmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 19:11:41 -0500
- Message-id: <199611060123.RAA21356@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: "The Book Arts: binding, typography, collecting" <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jack Thompson wrote:
>Sorry to have to disagree with this premise.
The premise being that permanence is not top priority when it comes to
making art. At the risk of starting an argument, I don't think this has
ever in history (he said redundantly) been a premise or even a serious
consideration for artists, and here I mean a person who is compelled to
make things, not necessarily functional. And with the exception of the
pyramid makers and the cathedral builders who knew their work would last a
> For me, as a conservator,
I understand, and appreciate your interests and concerns, but hope that you
can understand that sometimes artists have no choice. Often, it's not the
object but the creation which is essential - of course an object satisfying
to more than one is nice. :-)
>If you take money for it, you have an obligation to either insure that what
>you sell will be around for a reasonable length of time,
>or to explain to
>the purchaser that the art is ephemeral.
I don't mean to be flip here but I think the whole idea of permanence is
relatively new (though I invite you to enlighten me, gently) and only
recently have some artists been factoring it into their creative process.
With time and some strong evangelism on the part of conservators, more may
begin to see the light and at least give it (the idea) some thought.
Editor, CBBAG Newsletter
**Canadian Bookbinders and Book Artists Guild on the Web**