To begin, I must first say that this is one adorable essay.

When I first heard the phrase “artists’ books,” I thought that they would be a portfolio or journal of an artist’s work, like a series. However, after our time with them on Tuesday, I came to a better definition which reflects the first one given by Lorenz in her article. Artists’ books are really just another artists’ work. It is a piece of art, a stand alone piece. Though I would love to call whatever new craze as art, I was skeptical for once in my life about these books. They are not, in my opinion, works derived entirely by the artist alone. They are parodies, plays, and mutilations of former books. While I would still grant them their status as parody, the uniqueness of their creation seems blurred. Then again, that is essentially what art does. It comments on everything, including the history of art.