In class yesterday, I was fascinated by all of the different books. Some books, more than others, stuck out at me. When I went to look at the Alice in Wonderland book, I realized that if I hadn’t been told which book it was, or chapter for that matter, I would never have guessed chapter 5 of Alice in Wonderland. The artwork was so unique and I was blown away by the artists interpretation of that particular chapter of the story. In Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, I loved how the words became harder to read and more elaborate as the main character goes more and more insane. By the end of the book, I was unable to make out the story. The Macbeth story also stuck out to me. I found the little summary of the story to be quite comical. This led me to do some internet browsing and I stumbled upon this website, which is by the artist of the Macbeth book, and shows some other stories done in a similar way. In class, we asked the question, what is a book? After seeing all these different and interesting pieces, it has become much harder for me to answer that question.
I agree that, while all of the books were fascinating, I found the texts that I was already familiar with more interesting to examine. Most Western readers are familiar with the texts you mentioned (Alice in Wonderland, Jekyll/Hyde, MacBeth). I think it is because these texts are so well known that an artist’s interpretation of them is all hte more intriguing. These artists put a new spin on old classics and made us rethink what we thought we knew about these texts.
I agree that had I not known the one book was a chapter of Alice in Wonderland I would have had no clue what it was. But that said, I still could not make connections between the written chapter and the abstract art chapter. I would definitely like to hear the artist explain how each page relates to chapter 5 of Alice in Wonderland. In relation to that I thought the book essences were cool. However, again, I would like to hear why people chose the scents they did to describe each work.
It’s amazing how people can experience the same thing, yet have such differing interpretations.
That Macbeth book was interesting to me. To abridge that long, dense story into so few words means that the creator had to choose carefully, perhaps more than we would believe, the events and sentences he did. And I did call it a book. It is an independent text that has a clear purpose. What more is a book?
In regards to the Alice in Wonderland book, I too would have never guessed it was that book that was being portrayed. I think that each individual has a different way of perceiving things, and the author of the book in this case clearly had a very original point of view. If the author had not specified it was Alice in Wonderland being portrayed, I really doubt that anyone would ever guess it on their own.
Going back to one of our first discussions in class–author’s voice vs. readers’ perceptions–the Alice in Wonderland chapter because an interesting talking point. With no words or guidance for the reader, I think the author has little voice in the work and leaves it solely up to the reader to interpret the story or meaning.