tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7323662098477522684.post8704957408553128810..comments2024-03-07T15:39:24.593-05:00Comments on The Pressbengel Project: Exploring German bookbinding traditions and more...: Franz Zeier, BuchbinderPeter D. Verheyenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06756409905035122124noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7323662098477522684.post-61249272914631861072016-12-29T11:01:05.975-05:002016-12-29T11:01:05.975-05:00In quoting Zeier with "a book without a bindi...In quoting Zeier with "<a href="http://www.buchbinderei-koester.de/de/news/details/2015-05-08_Der+Handbuchbinder+Franz+Zeier.html" rel="nofollow">a book without a binding can still be read</a>," Pieper noted that many binders (especially those binders in the trade…) might feel slighted by it… <br />Like you, I don’t disagree. That said, I think it forms the starting point for a conservation about the book and bookbinding. Of course we can read a book without a binding, but here is why it should have an appropriate binding… The connection to content is an important one, and I think Zeier (and many others, especially of his and earlier generations) believed that a binding should reflext/complement the text. I think endless blank books would have been anathema to him/them beyond serving as a model/mock-up.<br /><br />In thinking about binding and the types of books we bind, I was encouraged directly and example to select binding structures/types appropriate to the text and its attributes. So, not bind a trade paperback in full leather with onlays and gold tooling for example. Rather, apply those techniques to a fine press book… I acknowledge that this will lead down a rabbit hole, and there are enough exceptions to can weaken that approach. I have to think of much of the work of Richard Minsky and his <i><a href="http://minsky.com/meiselshow.htm" rel="nofollow">Bill of Rights</a></i> series and other works as examples of where his treatment of trade books is integral to the conceptual nature of the work.<br /><br />But, back to Zeier, I think his words do not discourage what we do, but rather ask us to think more critically of what we do. His audience for <i>Books, Boxes, …</i> was also in the schools (at varying levels of development and skills), and more structured programs such as trade schools, the environment he was familiar with and taught in. As such, thinking critically is good and can promote the field through the development of innovative structures… like you are doing.Peter D. Verheyenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756409905035122124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7323662098477522684.post-51593020818977583382016-12-28T15:40:24.440-05:002016-12-28T15:40:24.440-05:00I wonder what motivates a bookbinder to write thin...I wonder what motivates a bookbinder to write things such as 'a book without a binding can still be read', or 'the most important thing about a book is its content'? Of course he is right, but I am struggling to see exactly how does this kind of thinking promotes what we do...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02263066746885187016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7323662098477522684.post-14684976175963078552016-12-24T12:51:32.875-05:002016-12-24T12:51:32.875-05:00Ben, please explain...Ben, please explain...Peter D. Verheyenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756409905035122124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7323662098477522684.post-67661366051020291662016-12-24T12:26:04.322-05:002016-12-24T12:26:04.322-05:00This man has had a profound influence on me, the k...This man has had a profound influence on me, the kind of influence that took me years to get rid of. I still regard his manual book boxes and portfolio as one of the best ever written but when it comes to his personal binding philosophy I now think he was waging the wrong kind of war and in the end probably did more harm than good to the profession.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02263066746885187016noreply@blogger.com