Author Archives: Micaela Macario

“Deconstruction” of the Book

Posted on by
2

As week 7 comes to an end, my thought process behind the book as an object has become more open ended than it has ever been. Borsuk in Chapter 3, of The Book, explains “Our changing idea of the book is co-constitutive of its changing structure” `(195). This statement perfectly shows that the bookishness of a book depends on the evolution of humans’ idea of a book. Artists such as Doug Beube have pushed the creative limits of the book as a medium. Dr. Pressman has stated in one of our first times in the Special Collections Lab that artists are supposed to challenge dominant narratives and push boundaries, and that is exactly what we see in this week’s readings. Doug Beube states in “Bookwork and Bookishness: An interview with Doug Beube and Brian Dettmer by Jessica Pressman, “Artists like myself pull the book apart to show that it is no longer the only way to present knowledge and information.” In the Digital Age, we focus primarily on a book’s content and solely focus on the words written on the pages. However, Beube’s work maximizes a books fluidity and confronts the idea that a book’s durability and immutable qualities. He challenges the readers to not overlook the stories and meanings embedded in the bookishness of the book itself, especially the physical and conceptual presence.

While browsing through Doug Beube’s remarkable artwork, I found myself seeing the book through a completely new lens. I no longer saw the book as a container of knowledge, but as an artwork that embodies its own narrative. I was particularly drawn to his piece Cuff. Before reading Beube’s explanation, I wrote my own interpretation “One is shackled and confined by the need to acquire all knowledge. One who is consumed with needing to know all will not feel the liberation of life.” I learned that Beube’s own description mirrored my definition. He interprets the work as reflecting how the censorship and restriction of knowledge parallel the culture of bondage and dominatrix, where readers experience pleasure through the restraint of knowledge itself. Beube’s work ultimately invites us to question not only how we consume knowledge, but also how we are bound by our search of it. In this way, the book ceases to be a mere object or container. I now truly see how the book is a living form that continues to evolve with our relationship with information, creativity, and artistry.

Critical Bibliographical Lens

Posted on by
3

Throughout the entirety of my academia, I have never once considered a bibliography to be more than a “work cited” section at the end of a text. To me, it was always just a way to grant credibility for liability reasons and in order to maintain academic integrity. A bibliography expands far past a way to avoid plagiarism. As The Bibliographical Society of America explains, there is a difference between the words bibliographic and bibliographic. Bibliographic being a citational record and bibliographical referring to the study of the physical features of the material printed texts (a.k.a. the bookishness of texts). 

When thinking about texts from a bibliographical perspective I immediately thought of the feelings and emotions that occurred when I was in the presence of the various texts in Special Collections. Although I was unable to read or understand any of the content on the pages, I was able to comprehend the history, craftsmanship, and purpose of the books simply by observing the physical characteristics in the paper, binding, cover, etc. The textures, designs, and structures of these texts revealed stories beyond their written content, highlighting that meaning can be derived not only from what is written but also from how it is materially presented and preserved.

The further reading section portrays the evolving discourse about bibliographical studies. Lisa Maruca and Kate Ozment explain the intersection between critical theory and bibliographical studies as a critical bibliography. Maruca and Ozment (2022) write “critical bibliography explores how critical theories can (re)shape our histories of the book and bookish objects and in turn how bibliography can be used as a tool to resist oppression.” For example, cheap mass production of printed texts accelerated the spread of hegemonic beliefs by making certain ideologies widely accessible while excluding others. The printing press not only expedited the production of texts but also lowered their cost, making the spread and consumption of oppressive ideas much faster. As someone who loves to know the “why” behind most things, I am eager to take this new approach to Special Collections this week as we also begin to start our midterm project. I will continue to ask myself: What historical occurrences shaped this text? How might the material qualities of the book itself reflect systems of power or resistance? How can I use a critical bibliographical lens to uncover stories that may not be visible in the written content alone?

Week 5: Books Becoming Content Based

Posted on by
4

After reading Chapter 2 of Amaranth Borsuk’s The Book, the curation of the book itself went from an intricate handmade artform to a mass production to fit the newfound purpose of the book, which is to use it for its content. Last Tuesday’s class in the Special Collections, we took the time to observe a variety of texts and the craftsmanship of the book itself. The covers, bindings, and format of the text revealed a history of the book without the reader even having to open it. For example, the intricate handmade cover of the Dominican Catholic Hymns book portrayed its importance with its ornate embellishments and high-quality leather. Being able to see the different handcrafted books in person highlighted the dramatic shift from books as art objects to books as content-based mediums.

I took a glance at my own personal book collection, and couldn’t help but notice that the majority of the books on my shelves are paperbacks with creased spines and flimsy covers that lacked any artistry. I flipped through the pages and noticed that most of the paper itself was so thin that I could see the words faintly through the other side. These observations display how “the printing press changed the book by facilitating its proliferation and separating the idea of the book from the object” (Borsuk, 76). Prior to the printing press, the book reflected more than the content inside. It was a portrayal of status and wealth not just a container of knowledge. The printing press made books more accessible and created the shift from sacred, one-of-a-kind artifacts to everyday commodities, valued primarily for the content they carried rather than the material form they took.

In my SOC730 course: Advanced Social Theory Class, we are discussing Marx theories that explain that with the increase in automation and capitalism we will see a decrease in work hours and more time for individuals to pursue arts and , to my understanding, more time to appreciate art. Will automation continue to decrease the artistry of books leaving them as disposable vessels of information? Or, perhaps, will it create space for a resurgence of book crafting as people search for meaning and beauty in tangible, handmade forms?

Accessibility Shapes the Book

Posted on by
1

After reading Chapter 1 of Amaranth Borsuk’s The Book, the deeply intertwined relationship between technology and “the book” has become clear to me. As Borsuk writes, “the book, after all, is a portable data storage and distribution method” (12). Books are not only a way to preserve human intelligence but also a means to spread knowledge quickly and efficiently across wide populations.

The ability to distribute knowledge has always been central to human progress. Like we discussed in class, information was reserved for the elite who had access to clay tablets or scrolls. These objects were fragile, time-consuming to produce, and limited in circulation. As a result, the spread of ideas was often slow and laborious. However, as Borsuk depicts in Chapter 1, the evolution of the book reflects a consistent pattern: each new form of book that came to be was to make storing and sharing knowledge more efficient. From tablets to scrolls to codex, these technological transitions were never random but rather direct responses to humanity’s ever growing need to communicate and learn.

Lying in the evolution of the book is, how Sigmund Freud states, human nature to know everything. People have always craved learning and sought faster, more accessible ways to acquire knowledge. With greater access to texts, more individuals were able to read, reflect, and expand upon existing ideas. What was once confined to a small region could suddenly travel across nations, inspiring revolutions in science, politics, and philosophy. The cumulative effect of shared knowledge created a foundation for the technological revolutions that followed. Without the distribution power of books and archives, many of the breakthroughs that define human history would not have been possible or traceable at that.

Yet, this relentless drive to make books more accessible has also come with a cost. Earlier books were not only containers of knowledge but also works of art. They were meticulously crafted by scribes and artisans. As printing technologies advanced, the emphasis shifted from artistry to efficiency, prioritizing mass production over craftsmanship. While this allowed knowledge to reach millions, it also diminished the individuality, beauty, and human labor once woven in every page. In our current digital era, the physical artistry of bookmaking is even further removed, reminding us that in our pursuit of accessibility, something of the book’s original artistry has been lost. This tension between accessibility and artistry also complicates how we evaluate media today. With mass production and the endless stream of information online, it is often difficult to decide whether media is “good” or “bad.”

Week 3: Intertwined Archaeal of New/Old Media

Posted on by
1

Our class readings this week felt like an awakening moment for me. For the past two weeks, I found myself perplexed by the discussions we’ve had in class. Not because the information being shared was a foreign concept, but because I was peering through a narrow-minded lens stating that the shift between new media to old media is a linear historical narrative.

Dr. Pressman unveils in her essay “Old/New Media” the term “bookishness” where the new digital media carves the new purpose for the traditional codex. Books are no longer depicted as holders for information, but as works of art, aesthetic objects, or even a multimedia experience. The simplistic linear ideology of “out with old and in with the new” is challenged as new media reinvents and adapts the purpose and perception of old media. Therefore, creating a boundless cycle of relativity to the term “new media.”

Reflecting on this, I began to connect Dr. Pressman’s idea to the digital text we debriefed las week, Mark Marino’s Marginalia in the Library of Babel. Marino’s work highlights how media forms are always shaped by the cultural perceptions of what is “new” or “current” media. For example, new media mindsets have encouraged us to regard books as objects of desire with symbolic and artistic value. On the other hand, less formal forms such as annotations in the margins or simple yellow Post-it notes inside a book do not carry the same level of prestige. While books are held to the highest of regard because of the ideals set by “new media,” personal annotations are viewed as disposable, even though they also contribute to the layered history of texts are used and interpreted.

Here I remain curious and my questions still remain. What determines the hierarchy of celebrated and dignified medias? How are we to excavate an object of knowledge knowing that it will continue to be ever changing? Or even how will marketing ventures utilize the study of book history to their advantage?

Introduction – Micaela Macario

Posted on by
2

My name is Micaela Macario, and I am a first year graduate student in the MALAS program. For those who don’t know, MALAS stands for Master of Arts in Liberal Arts and Sciences. I was born and raised in San Diego (Chula Vista to be exact), but have been blessed to travel all over the country playing collegiate softball. I spent my first two years of undergrad at the University of Central Florida where I loved people, but not my environment. I made the decision to come back home, and have never been happier.

Throughout high school and college, I have always had the dream of becoming a nurse. I worked as a Certified Nursing Assistant in nursing homes over summers, where I later discovered that I have deep rooted passion for advocacy, especially in healthcare. I also worked as a Care Coordinator for a startup home care business that truly believed and implemented culture-centered care. My goal is to one day revolutionize Western medicine by including patient narratives, cultures, and experiences into healthcare and treatment plans.

Beyond my academia and career aspirations, I am a huge sports fanatic, especially when it comes to the Padres. If you are a dodger fan, I will not hate you, but I might give you a dirty look every once in a while. I love trying new coffee shops as I practically run on caffeine. So if anyone has any cool spots, please let me know!

All in all, I extremely excited to learn beside everyone!