Monthly Archives: February 2013

Zero Draft Portfolio 1: On Alternative Histories

Leave a reply

The printing of a book required much more people in the first printing houses than today (now replaced by machines). So it was impractical to say any one person was responsible for the end result – we now often give full credit to the author of a  book we read, and substantial praise to the publisher. Of course, the subject of the books played a huge role: they were bibles, histories, and math books. The content of these books were meant for general knowledge; no creative force (author) behind it. In answering the assignment’s question, I would say that if the European’s conception of knowledge was* something to be shared, as a collective, copyright would change dramatically. That is; if Plato’s legacy remained when he said that knowledge exists outside of and before us, and we “recollect” it as we learn;  the idea of creating a text from one’s own labors would become absurd, and no one should have an individual right to such “creation” (Plato).

*Or, better, “had remained.” A similar conception of writing pervaded the medieval period: rarely did anyone write something new or unique. Instead, most authors rewrote legends. Today, someone would accuse Marie de France of plagiarizing Beroul, but then it was merely the way to write.

Who said what?

5 Replies

Although I agree that knowing the author of a piece of writing is important when attempting to discern the true meaning, I also believe that it can hinder one’s ability to discern a text’s importance. Take for instance this quote from Benjamin Franklin:

“If you want to know what a man’s like, take a good look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.”

This quote really resonates with you, and coming from one of America’s forefathers it is a great tip indeed. However, that was not Benjamin Franklin. The above is a line from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. And although the quote remains an excellent one, it no longer holds the same weight as if it were a direct quote from Benjamin Franklin. Here we can see the problems with believing a text to be from an author. We give words from historic or famous people a certain reverence that we would not otherwise. Who knows how many great works have been attributed, wrongly, to historically significant figures. As the old adage goes “don’t believe everything you read.”

Rare book collection

5 Replies

As an art history major I was particularly interested in the Nuremberg Chronicle illustrations. I have studied Albrecht Durer, a famous german wood block printer, in the past, and it was great to actually see these works of his predecessors up close. It was interesting to hear that the book contained controversy revolving around the inclusion of Pope Joan. In fact, in the edition we were shown someone went through the trouble of defacing this image and writing in a latin phrase to debunk this version of history. I wonder if there were any written responses to this book. It is also interesting that so much work went into the creation of a book, over 1509 wood carvings, that was not fully approved by the church.

Additionally, I found myself very interested in the books themselves as artifacts. Each book had a story attached. One could learn a lot from learning about previous owners, the materials used in the creation, marks left behind, the publishing house, and even which pages were most read. I loved all of the history associated with the books we looked at. The little quirks such as the Pope Joan story or the inker who stopped halfway through the book really animated the discussion for me.

The Correlation between Handwriting and Intelligence

2 Replies

Last class we discussed how bad handwriting can make one seem unintelligent.  Aesthetics were essential to the credibility and social status of books and authors hundreds of years ago.  According to Howard, The monks in the fourteenth century as well as the ancient and medieval scribes were required to be flawless without a single defect.   Before the invention of computers and typewriters, I wonder how many gifted and intelligent authors weren’t recognized because of their mediocre handwriting.

To further investigate this possible correlation, I found a study conducted in 1971 on 103 college students to search for a correlation between handwriting, intelligence, and personality.  They studied 47 different types “handwriting variables” and how they could predict behavior and answers to questions based on knowledge.  The study found that “clues about personality could be educed from handwriting.”  Specifically, 6 of 16 handwriting factors could be predicted by 5 of 10 personality and intelligence factors.  I could understand a few personality factors correlating.  For example i find myself to be pretty impatient with a “just go for it” attitude.  I could see this being a result of my bad handwriting because I like to write as fast as possible, getting as many of my thoughts on the paper as I can while i think of them.  I dont believe their found correlation between handwriting and intelligence is strong enough to make an official statement concluding that they are actually correlated.

Sarcasm: Now in punctuation form

4 Replies

I know we discussed how irony and sarcasm are conveyed through text and how meaning may be missed when the reader is unfamiliar with the author and their prior works and or views. This trend is obvious on Facebook and through email, on which it is difficult to convey sarcasm even to friends. However one software company has patented what they hope will become a punctuation mark to denote sarcasm in emails and other electronic media. The mark itself is called a Sarcmarc and looks like a spiral with a dot in the center of it.

http://02d9656.netsoljsp.com/SarcMark/modules/user/commonfiles/newmarkinfo.jsp

(The link is to the official SarcMark page and includes a download link)

(Their webpage is also a bit sub-par)

The Art of Writing

9 Replies

As I recall last class we were discussing our fountain pens and the differing forms of writing around the world, such as the brush pen ect. Professor Phillips made a point that we should think about how we form the letters that make up the words we write, they are all made up of simple lines and bars. This then got me to thinking about the art of Graffiti, I have some experience in this field and one of the more challenging aspects is attempting to find a style, the artist has to walk a fine line between legibility and artistic expression though often times artistic expression takes dominance over legibility. Finding ones own letter style is the same process as finding ones own handwriting. It all comes down to lines and bars.

Queries on the Course

1 Reply

According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, intellectual property consists of two categories: industrial property, such as patents and trademarks, and Copyright, which includes those creations of the mind like literature, films, and music (WIPO). I wonder, when did people conceive of the intellectual property? Who conceived it? And under what circumstances? After all, from reading Howard, it would appear the early books had no need to protect such artistic integrity. Writers of antiquity wrote their names on their own work, of course; and, when printing appeared, it took years before they decided to write the publishing house’s name or the place of publication. I wonder if attitudes toward intellectual property, and publishing in general, have truly changed since then. Did people in Gutenberg’s time believe in the free sharing of ideas? Or was it simply not even thought of; the prospect of a buyer much more important than the identity of the seller? I hope when we get to more modern developments of “books” we will see the contrasts more clearly.

P.S. Does that title count as alliteration?

history of the book

2 Replies

In the introduction section of Howard’s The Book, she writes “As with a person’s biography, the biography of technology is not limited to the object alone, but must encompass the history of people, places, and ideas that gave rise to the innovation”.  Before beginning to read the first chapter (Ancestors: Books before Print), I had never thought much about the history of the format of a book and how different eras and cultures each contributed to making “the book” what it is today. Upon reading this chapter I realized that I had just taken any history of books I had previously learned about for granted. I never considered the actual processes of making papyrus and parchment paper and I never thought about how unlike today, where no two people have the same handwriting, scribes were all trained to have the same handwriting because many times, multiple scribes would contribute to the same work.   With multiple scribes working on the same work, how is authorship divided?  Are any of them even considered authors considering they most likely weren’t the creative minds behind the work itself, but were instead the ones who brought the work to life through the rigorous process of printing? In this class I not only look forward to more closely looking at the various technologies that brought us to where we are today but also to looking more closely at the issue of authorship in this class.

Authorship and Its Importance

4 Replies

During last week’s discussions, I was struck by the idea that, for a period of time, the author of a given work was not deemed important.  This was discussed briefly in “The Death of the Author,” by Barthes, who, in part, argued that the author of work should not be important and, in fact, only hinders discussions of the work.  I have been taught in my studies that the author of a work is extremely important; it can help illuminate parts of a work by allowing critics to compare a work by a given author to other works by that same author.  In doing so, critics, teachers, and students of literature can find similarities and differences between a given author’s works and, at times, come to interesting conclusions that would not have been possible had the author been unknown, as Barthes would seem to have it.  In this class, I hope to learn more about how the “author” became an integral part of a work through social and technological changes in writing and publishing.

Comment from last week…

5 Replies

In talking about authorship, I thought Foucault’s argument was interesting in that the name of an author almost gives a “flavor” or significance to whatever text it is associated with. For example, I remember reading a study where the a group was presented with poetry from two sources: more modern, local poets, and historical, famous poets, such as Dickinson. The authors names were removed from each of the poems, and the group was told to rate the poems based on how “good” they seemed. Surprisingly, the poems authored by little-known people were given better overall ratings than the poems authored by a well-known source. A few people even thought the poems authored by the more famous people were “bad.” It’s interesting to see how the name of an author can so influence people’s ideas of their work – if the same work, or poem, was published by, say, myself, and Emily Dickinson, her poem would be the newest sensation, while mine would simply be sitting in some obscure literary magazine, never to be read by the masses. An author’s name is indeed a powerful thing.