The Genius of the Crowd (1 Viewer)

[hank solo]

Shame you weren't paid in pounds and were sending it to the UK :(

The only comparison drawn here is that both items are expensive. NQB was always a pricey item whereas Genius appears to be a flimsy piece not designed to survive. I very much doubt that I'll ever hold either one in my own hands, but for the record NQB looks like an ugly carbuncle of a piece.

 

[jordan]

i'm surprised there is such a sentiment against artist books- i mean, the art often times misses the mark, but i really like the idea of taking a smaller piece of text and combining it with art to create something that goes outside the original author's words. i mean, if you're really attached to the text and you think the art is shit, i can understand why you wouldn't like it, but look at the stuff that bukowski and crumb did together- that's essentially what you're talking about, but those editions don't seem like weird mashups that don't ultimately work.

also, the joyce/matisse edition of ulysses is, in my opinion, one of the more interesting author/artist combinations that i've come across. i'd really like to own a copy someday, but it's probably not happening.

 

[mjp]

i'm surprised there is such a sentiment against artist books [...] look at the stuff that bukowski and crumb did together- that's essentially what you're talking about, but those editions don't seem like weird mashups that don't ultimately work.

But if the Bukowski/Crumb books were bound in eelskin wrapped plywood semi-circles that weighed 40 pounds and retailed for $2950, the sentiment would probably be the same as it is toward NQB. I think people don't like it because they find it ugly, not because of the marriage of writing and art.

There's a difference between "artist's books" and "book art." Book art is not usually about content, but rather presentation ("Look, my book unfolds into a 30 foot long, inch wide strip of hand-painted mylar!"). To me, NQB was a stab at book art, and both as book art and as a marriage of book art and writing-presented-with-art (ala Bukowski/Crumb) I think it fails.

When I saw a copy I found it to be a very unfortunate object. But that's just my opinion. Beauty is in the eye of the buyer.

 

[jordan]

i have never seen NQB, so i guess i can't comment. but your post makes sense- i was reacting more to vicarious's statement about the whole being less than the parts. and, it's not eelskin, but there's the graphic arts edition of the captain that i would kill to be able to afford... and yes, because of the presentation, it's worth more to me than the standard edition.

on a side note, i actually have seen a book bound in eelskin. it's the limited editions club version of grass's "the flounder" and yes, it grossed me out.

 

[ROC]

Comparisons between Genius and NQB strike me as the height of silliness - pitting a beautifully produced artifact of its time against a manufactured artist book forcing another dubious marriage of artist and poet (see Heat Wave or the Joyce/Matisse edition of Ulysses) in which the whole is less than the sum of its parts.

I wasn't comparing the two books...
I was raising the issue of buyers remorse.
You should learn to read more carefully before shooting your daft gob off.

Oh, and if anyone was looking for book art... you can't go past It Catches My Heart...

 

[Rekrab]

I'm all for artist's books, and NQB seems like a good match up between text and image. The binding kills it as a total package. What were they thinking? It must have been made during that brief period in our culture when the trendsetters tried using denim for everything, whether it worked or not, and there were denim toilet seat covers and denim typewriter covers. I don't think any of it looked right. Jeans, yes, book covers, no. But I've seen some wonderful artist's books where everything did come together.

 

[ROC]

Hey! Are you knocking my denim toilet seat cover?!