In
a recent reading of Elaine Treharne’s blog Text
Technologies, I am
particularly drawn to comment upon her two most recent posts 'The Broken Book I: Getty Exhibition “Canterbury and St. Albans: Treasures from Church and Cloister”' and 'The Broken Book II: From a Book of Hours to a Book of Bits,' which considers the
implications of
the dismantled the book and the dissemination of its pages.
In these two posts Treharne aptly discusses the decontextualised
nature of a deconstructed book, which,
per my understanding of her posts, not only disregards the intended
functionality of the folios, but also defiles the book as an object
via the dispersal of its contents.
At
this juncture, I shall take the opportunity to clarify that I concur
with Treharne’s arguments and support her cause to maintain the
integrity of manuscripts. However
these posts have
sparked an alternate line of inquiry for
me, which I deem
should be examined with regard to the fact that manuscripts are
currently, and have been at certain points in history, altered or
completely deconstructed for one reason or another. Hence, I posit
that we as academics consider
what new meaning, if any, the disseminated part of a manuscript
embodies vis-à-vis
its meaning in book form.
Let
us consider a hypothetical example of a folio removed from a medieval Turkish
manuscript on the practice of medicine. This illuminated folio, along with many others, is now sold in market
places where tourists and other interested buyers congregate to
purchase a piece of history to transport home. Envision the
manuscript, a bound object comprised of pages that were intentionally
created to fulfill a certain purpose. These pages are filled with
text and image that were once used to impart knowledge to both
established and aspiring physicians, but is now dismantled in order
to be sold to laymen who may or may not be cognisant of the folio’s
original intended purpose. Is it symbolic, insofar that it acts as
representation of a unit of meaning for the new owner’s life
experiences? Do these pages convey a completely new narrative, or are
they now a disjointed aspect of a chronicle that is now lost?
Finally, has the folio lost its ‘bookishness’?
In
keeping with the example of the pages from the Turkish medical
treatise, it may be suggested that in the
possession of a physician, these pages may be a textual and pictorial
embodiment of a vocation that existed long before his lifetime, but
at the same moment speaks of his occupation today. Within this
context, the now disembodied elements of the book are redefined. They
are no longer a manner in which to teach about medicine, but are now
a vehicle that link time and space, insofar that these folios
represent the history of the owner’s occupation through the lens of
another culture at a different point in time. This representation
does not alienate the physician from his place within medicine today,
but instead it intertwines his practice with those of the past. This
creates a new narrative for the physician about his own experiences
as a doctor in light of the experiences of the medical practitioners of the past who
now exist within the realm of historical narratives. With this in
mind, the folios may then symbolise medical practice and perpetuate
the concept of a time continuum of occupational community for the new
owner.
The example provided is meant to engender a thought process that considers the potential for new meaning. It cannot speak for each folio from a disassembled
book, and in an alternate scenario, the folio may be further removed from its original intended function, but an ontological change may still occur. Even though the book that once held
these pages together has now lost its primary functionality, its
contents may acquire a new purpose. I will not suggest that this new
purpose is more important than the book’s original intended
function, nor that the act of defiling a book is in anyway
appropriate. I will suggest, however, that a book that has had its
pages removed from its bindings does not indicate its death, but
instead it calls for a reconsideration of the ontological state of
its contents. But, does this mean that the pages themselves have lost
their essence of being part of a book? I would initially suggest that a page that has been physically removed from its original form cannot be stripped of its origins. However, I shall leave this for further
discussion.
~Shandra
~Shandra
<a href="http://www.hypersmash.com">Hyper Smash</a>
I had the same thoughts reading Elaine Treharne’s posts. It's terrible to find out in what a manuscript has become, but, at the same time, these unfortunate incidents start a new life for the manuscript itself. Something that is worth studying and that reflects a whole world of manuscript's use. I'm use to working with fragments of charters or even with charters in full that suffered the lactic acid on them to ease their reading. Knowing why these were selected specifically to pass through the reactive is a clear indication of their importance and meaning for readers.
ReplyDelete