(continued from yesterday)
I would like to see the lecture part of the Codex become more participatory, in the sense of having space for exhibitors and others to propose talks (panels?). I think that the audience, composed mostly of exhibitors, was a bit disengaged from the presentations. Those talks came from people who were also exhibitors, but there was a certain amount of separation between those chosen to speak and the rest of us who were paying money to be there. We sat and listened, but didn’t necessarily have a stake in what was being said. Open it up, I say.
The Bookfair is the main event of the Codex, which is what makes it different from the other art conferences that happen around the country. I’ve been to a few Southern Graphics Council Conferences, and the open portfolio time has always been one of the most enjoyable parts. And the Codex was three whole days of that.
I felt like the bookfair was organized well. There was a nice, long set up time on Sunday that was only open to exhibitors, so that we had time to see each other’s work (I, of course, was very late). The room was perfect. There was an outside section, and that felt a little separated. The problem is, does one limit participation to make it feel less separate, or allow more people? There were rumors of some lighting complaints. I definitely had enough light the whole time. There was some thought put into how the tables were laid out. I was lucky enough to be placed next to the Two Fine Chaps, who I knew from previous shows. The “power players” at the fair were a bit too concentrated though. The tables that are going to draw a lot of people should be a bit more spread out. It’s important that the audience circulates, sees as much as possible, sees new things.
Exhibitors could ship their work to and from the show directly. I didn’t have to do that, but I can see where it would be convenient. A nice touch: the conference tote bag that we all got contained a roll of packaging tape.
All of the events were close, easily walkable. Plenty of places to eat nearby. It was all so easy.
Overall, it was great. I am already looking forward to next time. I am looking forward to getting in deeper.
Showing posts with label Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reviews. Show all posts
20090218
20090217
THE CODEX REPORT, PART 1
I wanted to take some time and write a more thorough piece on my thoughts on the Codex Symposium and Bookfair. Here is the first part:
As stated in earlier posts, my overall impression of the experience was very, very positive. It was, of course, not perfect—but still very good. Most importantly, I had fun and I met other people in the field. A table at the Codex is expensive, and I did not even come close to making my money back. Part of that is because I was selling cheaper work, another part may be because the collectors looking to buy more expensive work did not circulate to every table, or maybe because my work, not necessarily looking expensive/traditional/super-fine-press-book-ish at first glance, simply did not interest them. Also, there’s that whole economy thing. Making my money back would have been nice, but, again, that’s not the most important thing.
I enjoyed the symposium lectures as a whole. There were two kinds of lectures: longer lectures on various bookish topics, and shorter lectures called “artist presentations” where individual artists spoke in depth about individual projects. Appropriately, coincidentally, this year’s speakers for the artists’ presentations were on the younger side and doing conceptually sophisticated work. These included Tate Shaw of Preacher’s Biscuit Books/Visual Studies Workshop, Emily McVarish, Clemens-Tobias Lange of Ctl-Presse, and Karen Bleitz of Arc Editions. All of these were thoughtful, engaging presentations of strong, interesting work.
The longer lectures were a bit more hit and miss. The first, by Lawrence Weschler, could have been really good but missed the mark. It was about the difference between reading from a book and reading from a screen, between books and the Internet. That old thing again. An important subject, but a few years too late for that audience. Weschler is obviously a very smart, funny, engaging man. But he did not know his audience—or maybe he did. His talk posited the traditional dichotomy between books and the Net (like books are linear, unified, the Net is non-linear, fragmentary) and perhaps part of the audience felt comfortable with that old routine. But I think many of us were aware that that dichotomy doesn’t hold, that such a separation doesn’t get us anywhere. It considers both books and the web as ossified, determined structures (books particularly). Tate Shaw spoke right after Weschler, about his new book The Placeholders Vol. 3, and showed, not necessarily intentionally, where that traditional dichotomy begins to fall apart. Shaw’s book was built around a relatively simple premise and used notions of software as its organizing metaphors. It created a non-linear, fragmentary space within the linear structure of the book. It showed how both sides of the book/web dichotomy can be contained at once.
Antoine Coron’s lecture was on the publishing of artists’ books, actually mostly fine press books, in France. He started with some history and then detailed the work of a few contemporary artists/presses. Interesting, but not really written for a talk. It was too academic. I would have much rather read it.
Ron King of Circle Press gave a lecture detailing his long and productive career. It was very good. I would say “inspiring” if I believed in inspiration. King has been making books for a long time and his work is very influential. He has done many different kinds of work, and has never let the fear of trying new things stop get in his way. A good model for the rest of us in the field.
TO BE CONTINUED!
As stated in earlier posts, my overall impression of the experience was very, very positive. It was, of course, not perfect—but still very good. Most importantly, I had fun and I met other people in the field. A table at the Codex is expensive, and I did not even come close to making my money back. Part of that is because I was selling cheaper work, another part may be because the collectors looking to buy more expensive work did not circulate to every table, or maybe because my work, not necessarily looking expensive/traditional/super-fine-press-book-ish at first glance, simply did not interest them. Also, there’s that whole economy thing. Making my money back would have been nice, but, again, that’s not the most important thing.
I enjoyed the symposium lectures as a whole. There were two kinds of lectures: longer lectures on various bookish topics, and shorter lectures called “artist presentations” where individual artists spoke in depth about individual projects. Appropriately, coincidentally, this year’s speakers for the artists’ presentations were on the younger side and doing conceptually sophisticated work. These included Tate Shaw of Preacher’s Biscuit Books/Visual Studies Workshop, Emily McVarish, Clemens-Tobias Lange of Ctl-Presse, and Karen Bleitz of Arc Editions. All of these were thoughtful, engaging presentations of strong, interesting work.
The longer lectures were a bit more hit and miss. The first, by Lawrence Weschler, could have been really good but missed the mark. It was about the difference between reading from a book and reading from a screen, between books and the Internet. That old thing again. An important subject, but a few years too late for that audience. Weschler is obviously a very smart, funny, engaging man. But he did not know his audience—or maybe he did. His talk posited the traditional dichotomy between books and the Net (like books are linear, unified, the Net is non-linear, fragmentary) and perhaps part of the audience felt comfortable with that old routine. But I think many of us were aware that that dichotomy doesn’t hold, that such a separation doesn’t get us anywhere. It considers both books and the web as ossified, determined structures (books particularly). Tate Shaw spoke right after Weschler, about his new book The Placeholders Vol. 3, and showed, not necessarily intentionally, where that traditional dichotomy begins to fall apart. Shaw’s book was built around a relatively simple premise and used notions of software as its organizing metaphors. It created a non-linear, fragmentary space within the linear structure of the book. It showed how both sides of the book/web dichotomy can be contained at once.
Antoine Coron’s lecture was on the publishing of artists’ books, actually mostly fine press books, in France. He started with some history and then detailed the work of a few contemporary artists/presses. Interesting, but not really written for a talk. It was too academic. I would have much rather read it.
Ron King of Circle Press gave a lecture detailing his long and productive career. It was very good. I would say “inspiring” if I believed in inspiration. King has been making books for a long time and his work is very influential. He has done many different kinds of work, and has never let the fear of trying new things stop get in his way. A good model for the rest of us in the field.
TO BE CONTINUED!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
