…the packaging of multiple planes held together in a fixed or variable sequence by some kind of hinging mechanism, support, or container, associated with a visual/verbal content called a text.
Smith excludes scrolls and other single-plane formats from the notion of book, placing emphasis on multiple planes that have a “necessary relationship” and are joined together to create a whole.
In general I would agree with this. However, I was curious as to how electronic books fitted into this definition. Clearly they are still reproductions of books, but does the fact that they do not have a physical manifestation (only electronic) make them any less a book? I think perhaps that Smith’s insistence on a “hinging mechanism, support, or container” to hold together a book was too narrow.
This question was clarified, in a rather roundabout way, by Ed Hutchins article What is a Book. In his discussion of the exclusion of scrolls from the category of books by traditional thinkers, he stumbles on an important distinction. Why, he asks, are scrolls not recognized as books when they are in fact merely scrolls that have been folded instead of rolled? “Do folds make the books?” I felt that this was asked rather sarcastically, as if such a prerequisite were petty. Ironically though, Hutchins answers his own question further on in the article: "The information contained in scrolls did not run the entire length. Instead it was divided into columns or ‘pages’."
I believe that it is this division of information that is crucial to the definition of a book – the folding found in concertina books is merely the form this division takes in that particular form. Going back to electronic books, we find divisions at the end of each page. Even audio books are divided into chapters between which there are pauses.
The other important issue that concerns the definition of a book is the distinction between art and books. The article Is it a Book? by Emily-Jane Dawson, discusses the variety of ways in which artists have experimented with the physical aspects of the book form, making books “Active parts of text rather than Passive containers of information.” Is a book still a book when its physical structure has been altered so that you can no longer read/view its contents. Is it still a book when the message conveyed by the form of the book is more important than the information contained within the book? Dawson writes that experiments such as these result in “books which are textual or book-like but cannot or were not meant to be easily read – they might be said to be more sculptural than booklike.” (Italics mine). I think that this is where the distinction lies. For me, at the end of the day, a book’s purpose is to convey the information it contains (or has the potential to convey, as in a blank journal). If the book’s physical form is such that it overrides, or obscures the text within, it becomes art, and is no longer a book. As Smith sums it up: “The book-maker’s art should be distinguished from the art-maker’s book”.
As to what my definition of a book is… I don’t believe there ever will be a perfect definition of the book Nonetheless I think it should meet the following requirements:
- It should be multiplanar – not necessarily separate physical pages, but also including blocks marked out in scrolls, or page separators in electronic formats.
- These planes should be linked by some sort of relationship, and should be gathered together to form a whole, and bound in some way.
- A book’s purpose is to convey its content. This can be done as creatively as you like, but if the form of the book – physical, graphically, or otherwise – obscures the content, it becomes art and is no longer a book.
Dawson, E., Is it a Book?, Book Arts, 1997. Accessed February-March, 2011: http://www.philobiblon.com/isitabook/bookarts/index.html
Hutchins, E., What is a Book? Book Arts List, 1996. Accessed February – March, 2011: http://www.artistbooks.com/editions/wiab.html
Smith, P., The Whatness of Bookness, or What is a Book, Book Arts Web, 1996. Accessed February – March, 2011: http://www.philobiblon.com/bookness.shtml
