[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Philosophy of Bookbinding
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: The Philosophy of Bookbinding
- From: Patricia Sterritt <10444fenwick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:39:23 -0400
- Message-id: <199810031532.IAA21372@SUL-Server-2.stanford.edu>
- Sender: "Book_Arts-L: READ THE FAQ at http://www.dreamscape.com/pdverhey" <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The philosophy thread has brought out some interesting perspectives,
not sure if it is off- or on-topic, about binding, or about content?
The "information" thread keeps appearing in the discussion--
Kevin Crombie wrote
> Think about it for a moment: what is the difference between a stack of
> papers containing "information" and a bound book containing the same
> information? A book is organized -- information follows a particular
> progression, the reader has certain expectations about where to find
> (page 3 follows page 2, etc).
A stack of papers containing information remains a stack of info even when
bound and organized. It is then more easily accessed information,
preserved for posterity. Our society relies upon the preservation of data
to carry out the business of living.
This could describe a courthouse record.
However, the concept of the book would seem to embody more than
information, but the exploration of relationships among data, or the search
for meaning. It seems that books as collections of information (records)
look back, books as ideas push forward the realm of human thought. This
could describe the book as art.
This is probably way off the original path, which may have been more about
bookbinding than content-- just couldn't resist