[Table of Contents] [Search]

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

Re: Definition of the Artists Book (YES, again)

What about a book which is itself the thing to be communicated, not a
support for conveying something other than itself. Even though it may seem
to be just a rewording of the term to be defined, I do feel important to
stress the fact that in an artist-book the book is the art, not just a
possible enabling factor for time delayed (mass)communication.


>Date:    Wed, 4 Mar 1998 11:08:07 -0500
>From:    Peter Verheyen <pdverhey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Definition of the Artists Book (YES, again)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>We've had this debate before, but I'd like to pose this question again.
>Why, do I want to do this to myself again, well I'm giving a presentation
>to an Art History class on "artists books" and people have been clamoring
>for a definition.
>What I'd like is for people to think about this subject and submit a
>concise (1 paragraph) definition. I'll select a few of these and put them
>into a handout. If there's enough interest I may put them together as a
>web file and post on the Book Arts Web.
>Thanks for your help.
>Peter Verheyen, Listowner: Book_Arts-L
>315.443.9937 <wk> 315.443.9510 <fax>

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