Category Archives: Week 8: Book as Interface- Meggs and Mak

Borsuk’s Final Chapter, “Book as Interface”

Posted on by
Reply

In Chapter 4, “Book as Interface,” Borsuk presents the book as not just an object, but as something we interact through, an interface which connects us to ideas. She explains that “the book is an idea we have of a bounded artifact… able to take any number of physical forms… It is, essentially, an interface through which we encounter ideas” (Borsuk, 197). I found it interesting how Borsuk sees the book as flexible and adaptable, yet still rooted in the habits we’ve built over centuries of reading. Even when we read digitally, we’re still basing it on “a history of physical and embodied interaction that has taught us to recognize and manipulate it” (Borsuk, 197). Even our digital reading experiences are shaped by how we’ve learned to hold and manipulate the physical, material book.

Borsuk points out that “the book accommodates us, and we accommodate to it” (Borsuk, 198). Borsuk presents the relationship between us and the book as not a one way relationship, but two. We shape how books are read, and they shape how we read. She brings in Lori Emerson’s argument that modern technology often hides its interfaces, “turning us into consumers rather than producers of content” (Borsuk, 198). Despite this, the physical book continues to influence how we think about reading, “the book is a model… for the way we think about reading in electronic spaces” (Borusk, 201). Our e-readers, kindles, and various digital readers still mimic the design and pages of what we view as the classic ‘book’, even though they don’t have to. With modern technology, we have nearly infinite ways to re-imagine reading, yet, the physical, material book still guides us. 

Obtaining, Processing, and Distributing the Interface

Posted on by
Reply

I found the descriptions regarding legal gray areas that The Internet Archive and Google Books went through very revealing of the digital age’s growing pains. The Internet Archive went through a major legal case after quarantine when several large publishers accused Archive for giving out free copies of books under something Archive called “the emergency library”. The emergency library was created for people to continue to access books even though they did not have physical access to their libraries. In the end, The Internet Archive lost the case. This case reflects Google Books when the “Author’s Guild… filed [a] suit in 2005 for copyright infringement… they argued that the library project, which scans numerous copyright–but out-of-print–works, was illegal, and that Google needed to pay royalties for these books” (Borsuk 228). Google argued that their use was “like an author quoting a source… but at the level of the code” (Borsuk 228).

Both of these cases illustrate how distribution manifests itself very differently with e-books. While free distribution of copyrighted books is not allowed, searchable snippets are. The digital age has brought a different way to interact with books that was not possible before. Now, we can distribute a near-infinite number of books of all kinds. We can parse through them with unprecedented detail. Yet, only certain forms of distribution are allowed. In large part, Capitalism plays a role in the logic of distribution legality. The Archive wanted to freely distribute books, Google wanted to make it easier to find snippets of books which the reader would (presumably) eventually buy. I do not want to make any claims of foul play in the decision making process of these cases, however, I will argue that there is a capitalistic ethos at play which seems to almost arbitrarily draw lines on copyright law until one considers the monetary potential of these decisions. In other words, stealing intellectual work only matters when someone can’t make money anymore. It only seems to matter when the entity unable to make money from intellectual work has enough bargaining power to make someone listen. In this case, it is the major publishing companies.

People no longer need to go to the library or scour through multiple books to find the information they need. Knowledge is as far away as a few clicks. The distribution of knowledge is as free as it ever has been, presumably this gives further justification to ideas of meritocracy. Additionally, e-lit can be parsed through for information incredibly quickly in a way that physical books cannot. This rationalizes the modern fetishization of physical books–of book-ishness. E-Lit is for information, physical books are for leisure. In some ways, it is a symbol of class divide. To have time to read is to have time for leisure, to have time for leisure is to be upper-middle class.

A Forgotten Art

Posted on by
3

Unlike a canvas in the art world; the sheet of paper is not a respected piece of art form and also a forgotten one. Mak shows us how true this is when explaining how we as a society have been using paper for essentially for over two millenia, and we have never really looked into the piece of paper itself. That we have always looked past it and perhaps, we may have read the page to quickly (literally). “In our haste to establish a history of the book, we have read the page too quickly. The page has remained a favored spaced and metaphor for the graphic communication ideas over the span of centuries and across different cultural milieux – Yet the page has become transparent, disappearing in its very function”(Mak 8). Mak is telling us that we as a society have never appreciated paper and what it has done for us even though its our preferred choice of space to share our imagination. It is indeed more than just a container in which ideas can be woven into it and that more is the history in which we often forget about quiet often. As Mak states in the quote, we constantly associate drawing and writing on a paper which is its function, but never saw past its function to truly learn about the material and history of the paper. Pretty ironic considering how we are never taught about the history of paper even though we constantly use it or see it almost every single day of our lives.

I too, am a person who never really paid much attention to the page. I always viewed it as a place to explore one’s imagination, but its physical aspect was something I never took into thought. Which is crazy considering how I grew up knowing the differences between the material of paper, but never really the why its using that specific material. Mak and Borsuk’s ideas of looking past the content and looking into the physical form of these art pieces reveals to us that we as a society are starting to lose the real history of some important things because we are blinded by the power of its function.

Surrealism in Short

Posted on by
2

A child looks up to the sky and makes out an elephant, a piece of cheese, or an animated character from a popular cartoon–all within the clouds. That same child, grown up, may now see new configurations, or they may very well search for those same images above their heads. When looking at clouds, the surrealist attempts to embody the youthful mind in search of nothing specific, but rather any and every thought that crosses their mind. Drawing from Bonnie Mak’s “How the Page Matters” and Phillip Megg’s “History of Graphic Design” section on Surrealism, our worldviews are encouraged to be ever-changing, rather than stagnantly adhering to tradition.
As cloud-sighting is yet to follow a traditional norm, the same cannot be said for writing. Mak weighs in on this, saying, “From a young age, we are trained to believe that the boundaries of the interface are always identical to the edges of the material platform of the page. (Mak)” In a modern example, it could be seen as the default margins for Google Docs I’m typing through now. I have this much space; therefore, I must use it, and so I do. Most people follow suit, though to the surrealist, the page is no longer a constraint, but a feeding ground. With this movement, “Intuition and feeling could be freed, (Megg)” and the question turns from “what do I want to fill this page?” into simply “what do I want?”
Though asking “what do I want?” is not always the question when considering stream-of-consciousness or automatism writing. Allowing subjectivity opens the mind to past associations, such as the elephant or the piece of cheese. To change your mind requires a dissolution of previous thoughts, traditions, or beliefs. Only then will the cloud acquire a completely new meaning–one you may have never known possible.
But why is this important? Why is a new cloud configuration important to us as humans? The answer lies in what the surrealists seek–an uninhibited truth. For example, books without blank space existed until someone stepped back from the tradition of pinching pennies and left a bunch of blank space. In turn, this opened the door to a multitude of benefits, whether room for marginalia or easier, faster reading, as noted by Mak.
It’s important to note that the example I’m labeling surrealism existed years before the term was coined. Intuition has existed since the dawn of time, and the times human draw their focus to it may all be called surrealist. So, sure, you may see an elephant in the clouds because you have before, but what does your gut see?

Week 8: Propaganda, Attitude, and Artistic Choices

Posted on by
4

Everything is political and has a purpose, especially in what people view. Every letter font, size, style of language, is chosen for a specific purpose. Art, paper, and ink, have history in political events, pressure, and perspective.

For example, we talked about in class how Blackletter changed to Roman type during the Nazi regime because of the founding and implications of using that specific font. Type, font, and ink, can be used for different types of propaganda and tried distinctions between people and who they see as unequal to them to status. Historically, wealthier people have tried to bar out or distinct themselves from those with less through refined language, slang, or writing in latin or calligraphy. They’ll have personalized stationery with multiple envelopes with gold leaf or wax.

Often with printed or written propaganda, there will be a set standard that it is based upon. There will be a certain process used to achieve different varieties of products but will achieve the same outcome of drawing viewers in and getting them to associate an emotion with an action or person. I’ve found it very interesting in different eras and places, the same tactics are used repeatedly. Big font with strong primary colors with simple, but strong text. The language and assortment of text is curt to get the point across like Hope, Change, We can do it!, even callbacks when Trump uses Reagan’s campaign slogan in simple font with a relatively plain red background. This usage of bright spread ink shows strong emotion and connects the viewer to past memory and likeness to another. It reminds me of a bull seeing red and continuing to tie the color with the action of charging towards it.

To be effective, something doesn’t need to be detailed, it needs to be eye-catching and sharp. Rigid lines or symbols or even attitudes of characters on the page reflect this ferocity of the message. The more detail it has, it causes us look too long, examining the intricateness of the propaganda and draw out it’s motives or ignore it as it isn’t easily digestible.

The printing press and publishing will always be one of the most powerful assets to propaganda and the spread of influence, like Gutenberg’s first purpose, spreading the bible. Every piece that goes into making posters or art or text is done with intention, changing the way for generations we have viewed and acted in the world.

The Medium is the Message

Posted on by
3

In Bonnie Mak’s introduction and first chapter of “How the Page Matters,” she introduces the importance of the page and how it influences the reader. In class, we have had many discussions about how “the medium is the message.” This sentiment has been woven through Mak’s chapters in which she argues that there is more to meet the eye when it comes to a page of a book. On page 8, of Mak’s chapter, she writes, “Yet the page has become transparent, ‘disappearing in its very function.’ So accustomed to its form, we no longer notice how the page is fundamental to the transmission of ideas and that it shapes our interpretation of those ideas.” With this quote we see how the page has slowly slipped from our minds. As we read, we no longer view the page as a canvas or artform. At first glance, a page might simply be seen as words on paper but it goes beyond that. Those words were carefully formatted in a way to capture a reader’s attention. The page is the vessel for the author’s content, able to display the information in the way that they want to convey it. Mak echoes Amaranth Borsuk’s ideas of content and books in which both of them claim that books are vessels for information. In chapter 2 of Borsuk’s “The Book” she claims, “the book as content rather than object.” These claims support that the medium is the message. The way that books present their content is extremely important to what the reader consumes and absorbs. As a result there is a deep intention placed into the consideration of format, typography, illustrations, etc. Every factor that goes into a book has the ability to alter the reader’s opinion. Later in her chapter, Mak expresses this importance of how every aspect of the page is incredibly significant. On page 16, Mak writes, “likewise, the structures for arranging these letter forms in manuscripts and printed books are graphic indications of how designers visualized ideas and organized them for themselves and other readers. The processes of thinking and reading, then, may be discerned in part from the clues offered by the page.” The page is an underrated yet incredibly crucial aspect of the book. This where the message is laid out for the reader. Significant time and effort has gone into the placement of ideas so that they reflect the author’s intentions. The layout is critical for information absorbtion. The page itself has become the message.

Week 8: Material Life Ideas

Posted on by
3

After reading Bonnie Mak’s introduction to “How the Page Matters”, it made me think about how I read books. I spend so much time thinking about “the what” when I read (the words, the arguments, the stories) that I rarely pause to consider “the how” when I read. More importantly, how the physical page itself shapes my understanding.

There was one passage that particularly struck me. “The page transmits ideas, of course, but more significantly influences meaning by its distinctive embodiment of those ideas.” (page 5) This seemingly straightforward observation leads to a deep line of investigation. With this, Mak is arguing that the page isn’t just a neutral container for information, it’s an active participant in creating meaning. The selection of paper or parchment, the size of the margins, and the inclusion or exclusion of images are not only aesthetic choices. They are also cognitive ones that radically change the way we interact with text.

What really got me fascinated with the reading the most is Mak’s challenge to the notion of “print culture” as a discrete historical era. I’d always kinda accepted the common narrative that the printing press created a revolutionary break from manuscript culture, but she presents me to see continuity and overlap. Even today, as we navigate between print books, PDFs, and mobile screens, I never would’ve thought we would be participating in the same ongoing conversation about materiality that medieval scribes engaged with when choosing between papyrus rolls and codices.

This makes me wonder about our current moment of supposed digital revolution. Are we really experiencing something unprecedented, or are we simply the latest chapter in a much longer story of technological adaptation? How does the material difference affect my understanding and memory when I read an article on my phone as opposed to in a real journal? What little changes in meaning take place when I turn in papers as Google documents instead of printed pages?

Mak’s work reminds me that intellectual history isn’t just about tracing ideas through time. It is about understanding how those ideas have been physically instantiated, designed, and redesigned across centuries. 

More Than a Safeguard

Posted on by
4

Within the first part of Bonnie Mak’s text, How the Page Matters, Mak states, “…the page has emerged as a safeguard for intellectual and artistic achievement” (Mak 3). But I believe the page is more than just a safeguard, it is also (something Dr. Pressman mentions a lot) a form of radical action, through the unique use of a page we reevaluate some of our core ideas and notions of the reality around us. For instance, if we think back to one of the special collection items we viewed last week, the astronomy foldable piece (if someone could remind me of its actual name and maker, I would deeply appreciate it because I am gelling right now), reimagines how we see the page. The individual triangles can be pages by themselves, or when it is all laid out it could be one big page, or when folded in a 3D shape the page itself can become 3D. These changes radically change our perception of reality. One thing can be many, and can shift between two states (like 2D to 3D). Both the piece and Mak’s text makes us think that if we don’t even know what a page is, then what do we really know about the world, society, and politics. There is this paradigm shift that deconstructs what we see and builds it anew. They both challenge and update what has commonly been seen as ‘normal,’ and leads to question things on a grander scale. The page can be a tool to bring about change not only in ourselves, but also in society (etc). This makes the page more than just a safeguard, more than a defensive tool, but also makes it an offensive tool that can make a real tangible change. Even making minutia changes to the page’s architecture can have profound impacts. Something as small as a margin can transform the way we take in or see knowledge. It also can change how we react to the content on the paper itself. One example I can think of is the use of margins, negative space, and words on a page that holds a poem to construct a specific shape. Or I also think about a page in a kid’s book that mimics the shape of the content or vice-versa. For instance, if the page is made into an apple shape, no matter the content you will automatically think of an apple, and also try to relate it to the content on the page itself. By deliberately changing the architecture of the page, one takes a radical action to change the readers’ thoughts and perceptions of the world.

Illustrations in Books

Posted on by
1

In class so far, we have discussed the cultural significance of blank spaces within text formats, but on Tuesday we had the pleasure of diving deeper into imagery and illustrations within texts. Dr. Pressman and our readings have mentioned that the blank spaces signify the cultural norm of silent reading. Similarly, the placement, positioning, and size of an image on a page “can propose an interpretation that is complementary, supplementary, or even contradictory” (Mak, 17). This idea connects directly to the aesthetics of the book, as imagery plays a key role in shaping how a reader interacts with and experiences a text. Whereas blank spaces guide the rhythm and pace of reading, illustrations often guide the focus and meaning of the content. The visual elements can elevate a book beyond its textual function, turning it into a cultural artifact that communicates through both language and design.

During our visit to the Special Collections Lab, we examined a botanical book in which the imagery was the central feature of the page. The detailed botanical illustrations were not just decorative, they were the primary conveyors of knowledge. The minimal text served a supportive role, naming or explaining what the images depicted. This visual display showed how illustration itself can embody meaning and serve as a scientific, aesthetic, and cultural tool. As Mak writes, “ illustrations can refer to the world beyond the page and participate in a wider discourse about the book that involves the social status of the particular codex, its designers, and its owners” (17). 

In this botanical text, the intricate images did more than portray plants. They connected art with science. The precision of the drawings demonstrated scientific observation, while their elegant presentation reflected artistic intention and cultural value. This bridging of science and art through the combination of words and imagery shows the aesthetic power of the book as a medium. It demonstrates how illustrations can extend the book’s purpose beyond reading into seeing, experiencing, and even situating the text within broader social, cultural, and intellectual contexts.

The Types of Typefaces, and the Feelings of Fonts

Posted on by
2

While reading chapters 13, 15, and 16 of History of Graphic Design by Philip Meggs, there was a section in chapter 16 that stood out to me. The section was titled Jan Tschihcold and the New Typography, and it followed the namesake Tschihcold and his life as a typographer. Typography as I new it was the study and creation of fonts. As someone that’s taken a few graphic design classes, I’ve spent a bit of time learning about typography. Not very much, but I know enough to adjust things like the kerning or spacing of an already existing typeface. I’ve never created my own font, and whenever I saw old drafts of existing fonts, I would realize that typographers took details into account that I had never considered.

Returning to Tschihcold, the chapter explains how influential he had been in the mass adoption of various typefaces for publishers. He had created something called the “new typography”, which was asymmetrical and challenged the current status quo. In 1933, Tschihcold was arrested in Munich by Nazi’s. Meggs writes, “Accused of being a “cultural Bolshevik” and creating “un-German” typography, he was denied a teaching position in Munich. After six weeks of “protective custody” Tschichold was released,” and at first, I was confused. Un-German typography? What does that even mean? But I quickly realized that it was because words have power, people trust writings and books. Even in modern times, certain fonts have certain uses and stereotypes surrounding them. I wouldn’t turn in an academic essay in comic sans, nor would I use a cursive font for a presentation. I don’t associate those activities with those fonts. I might not know why I think that way at first glance, but with some thought, we can come to understand how these perceptions form. Typography is not only about the text that is being written, it is an artform. And art can emotionally connect with people. If this font Tschihcold created felt un-German, and people began to associate this positive thing with other cultures or non-Nazi practices, then I can understand why it worried the Nazis. I’ve already established that typographers think about small details that the general populace don’t notice. It sounded paranoid at first, but if you desire power, that last thing you want is for the public to be able to read anything and everything.

After this incident, Tschihcold moved to Switzerland and work for a publisher. While doing so, he moved on from the new typography and began creating other projects. He still believed in new typography, but it was created as a response to the Nazi’s rise to power in Germany, and he didn’t feel there was more he needed to add to it. For him, typography was about expression; “He continued to feel that the new typography was suitable for publicizing industrial products and communication about contemporary painting and architecture, but also believed it was folly to use it for a book of baroque poetry, for example, and he called reading long pages of sans serif “genuine torture.” And this is something that I agree with. I am currently typing in a sans serif font, and I definitely prefer serif fonts!

Overall, fonts are important. They are how a word is written, and they effect how a word is read and perceived. This is something I’ve always loved about writing. For example, I have a story in my community college’s literary journal in which the real story is in the marginalia, and each character is assigned a different font, as if it was there handwriting. I chose each font for a reason, and it was important to me because how the characters were writing was just as if not more so important than what they were writing. In the modern day, we take advantage of how many fonts are available to us online, and we tend to forget that all of those fonts were first an idea, than made by hand.