Showing posts with label POD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label POD. Show all posts
20090714
THE DEMANDS OF ON-DEMAND, part 3a
The other day I decided to put my money where my electronic mouth is and buy some POD books by Clifton Meador. I am interested in these for several reasons: 1) I’ve only ever seen reproductions of Meador’s work, 2) he is an offset-photo book artist that has jumped right into POD, so I’m interested to see what he’s done with it, and 3) I will finally be able to closely inspect one of these books. There will be a full report later.
THE DEMANDS OF ON-DEMAND, part 3
(A slight digression)
At some point/place (I can’t remember exactly where or when) in the discussion of POD books among the artists’ books community, someone (I can’t remember who) brought up using POD as a teaching tool. This teacher said that they used POD in order to teach their students about how to organize content in a book. The idea being that if the student does not have to worry about how they are going to physically make the book, then they can focus on the content. It is the reverse of when students first learn a binding structure by putting together a blank book.
Good idea. I will totally use it at some point (when I have that theoretical teaching position).
Of course, the problem with using POD as a way to manipulate “pure” content (even in an educational context) is that it operates under the assumption that the technology is somehow completely transparent and neutral, that it does not, or can not, or should not, bring up questions of form (the same could be said of the mass-produced, offset artists’ book).
But there is rarely a structured assignment that can adequately tackle all possible issues in artmaking.
It’s finally affordable for an artist to make a photographic book in a small edition. That changes things. I know several photo-based artists who have already taken advantage of this. I think it finally opens the door for NewLights to do some more photographically-oriented work, also it may allow an opportunity to engineer some books in order to produce an edition of altered books…
At some point/place (I can’t remember exactly where or when) in the discussion of POD books among the artists’ books community, someone (I can’t remember who) brought up using POD as a teaching tool. This teacher said that they used POD in order to teach their students about how to organize content in a book. The idea being that if the student does not have to worry about how they are going to physically make the book, then they can focus on the content. It is the reverse of when students first learn a binding structure by putting together a blank book.
Good idea. I will totally use it at some point (when I have that theoretical teaching position).
Of course, the problem with using POD as a way to manipulate “pure” content (even in an educational context) is that it operates under the assumption that the technology is somehow completely transparent and neutral, that it does not, or can not, or should not, bring up questions of form (the same could be said of the mass-produced, offset artists’ book).
But there is rarely a structured assignment that can adequately tackle all possible issues in artmaking.
It’s finally affordable for an artist to make a photographic book in a small edition. That changes things. I know several photo-based artists who have already taken advantage of this. I think it finally opens the door for NewLights to do some more photographically-oriented work, also it may allow an opportunity to engineer some books in order to produce an edition of altered books…
20090709
THE DEMANDS OF ON-DEMAND, part 2
How can the NewLights Press use Print-On-Demand (POD) books as a primary mode of production?
My first thought was to use POD to reproduce and distribute existing, unique/small edition books. This has obvious advantages, and it is hard for me to square my desire to get the books to as many readers as possible with the form-content-production-reception integrity of the individual pieces. To cite a specific example: recently a friend brought up the idea of a “trade” version of The Drownable Species, because it is a book that many people are interested in, but few can afford. And I am very tempted to do a POD book of it (Though I would have to ask Brian, but I’m sure he wouldn’t mind, because he’s the nicest guy in the world. Coincidentally, he has a new book of short stories out.) But the problem with REproducing The Drownable Species is that it was produced through a physical disruption of a normally straight reproductive process (the pouring of water onto still-wet inkjet prints). The inherent unpredictability of that process combined with the disorienting effect it has on the reader are central to the book. (They are not essential to the story, but the thing is, as always, is to make the book so that it becomes more than just a “nice” printing/binding of a text.)
A reproduction of the book would mimic those effects. The idea would still be conveyed. Ah, there’s the problem: “the idea would still be conveyed.” The process of re-production would transform the book from a concrete (primary, actual) object into a representational (secondary, symbolic, simulacral) object. The real thing made into a sign for the real thing.
But it would be great to get the book out to more readers. A trade edition might even help sell more copies of the limited edition. It would be nice to sell more books, but this is not about money. At some point in the future, the story will be published in a collection of Brian’s stories. So the story will always be available…
TO BE CONTINUED!
My first thought was to use POD to reproduce and distribute existing, unique/small edition books. This has obvious advantages, and it is hard for me to square my desire to get the books to as many readers as possible with the form-content-production-reception integrity of the individual pieces. To cite a specific example: recently a friend brought up the idea of a “trade” version of The Drownable Species, because it is a book that many people are interested in, but few can afford. And I am very tempted to do a POD book of it (Though I would have to ask Brian, but I’m sure he wouldn’t mind, because he’s the nicest guy in the world. Coincidentally, he has a new book of short stories out.) But the problem with REproducing The Drownable Species is that it was produced through a physical disruption of a normally straight reproductive process (the pouring of water onto still-wet inkjet prints). The inherent unpredictability of that process combined with the disorienting effect it has on the reader are central to the book. (They are not essential to the story, but the thing is, as always, is to make the book so that it becomes more than just a “nice” printing/binding of a text.)
A reproduction of the book would mimic those effects. The idea would still be conveyed. Ah, there’s the problem: “the idea would still be conveyed.” The process of re-production would transform the book from a concrete (primary, actual) object into a representational (secondary, symbolic, simulacral) object. The real thing made into a sign for the real thing.
But it would be great to get the book out to more readers. A trade edition might even help sell more copies of the limited edition. It would be nice to sell more books, but this is not about money. At some point in the future, the story will be published in a collection of Brian’s stories. So the story will always be available…
TO BE CONTINUED!
20090707
THE DEMANDS OF ON-DEMAND, part 1A
The artist Clifton Meador (who I have quoted in earlier posts) has some books on the POD site Lulu.com, where you can order them directly.
THE DEMANDS OF ON-DEMAND
Yesterday I was thinking about Print-On-Demand, about making some books using Print-On-Demand (POD). While I have no problem using the technology and relinquishing the handmade-ness of the books (for some projects, not all), there are, I think, some important questions to consider before going into this (questions that I had ignored in my initial rush of excitement about putting a lot of books out, which is a main source of excitement and despair these days). Or maybe one important idea, coined by Philip Zimmerman:
“Production NOT Reproduction”
A very important idea when one is an artist using re-productive technology as a primary productive process. (The relationship between production and reproduction requires more investigation) So the question is how can the NewLights Press use POD books as a primary mode of production?
TO BE CONTINUED!
“Production NOT Reproduction”
A very important idea when one is an artist using re-productive technology as a primary productive process. (The relationship between production and reproduction requires more investigation) So the question is how can the NewLights Press use POD books as a primary mode of production?
TO BE CONTINUED!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
