Week 3:

The first chapter of History of the Book brought up some interesting points, but I feel like this chapter will only help me in so much as to get an idea of what other book history scholars are asking and saying:

For example:

New Bibliography:

----------------------------------seeking the original textual authorial meaning------------------------------

This theory assumes that texts were produced by compositors and printers through rational, constant patterns and means that were fixed constants that had little effect in output (9).

The largest rebuke came from a gentleman named McKenzi, he “proved that printing house operations in the seventeenth and eighteenth century England were not tidy and ordered, but were dominated by  what he called ‘concurrent production’: work habits varied considerably….texts was not the efforts of a single printer or editor” but was the work of a team allowing for variety (10).

These types of theories (along with Ong) have helped me get a better background for what is going on around the beginning of print. Especially that the reliability of the editor wasn't “a thing” until the 1760’s----------well after the “first novel” Robinson Crusoe, published in 1719.

One of the more interesting arguments that I am going to note is one by Adrian Johns. I believe his insertion/correction of Eisenstein’s theories on the book will be applicable to the modern transition to the digital age.

Johns argues that: “the development of print culture during the period covered by Eisenstein was less straightforward, marked by uncertainty and shaky integration” (19).

I believe that this quote is relate-able to the current transition to the digital e-reader because I, as an individual, appear to witness the messy transition to a digital age. Some people jump and leap toward the new technology while others claim that print (physical books) are better because the physical value leaves a personal connection to the substance that they hold in their hand. Also, the initial expense of an e-reader and the availability of texts online are another factor that I have discussed with individuals.

Some further lines of inquiry for me are: libraries online reading? –is that possible for the public (with a membership, of course)?

I literally took an image of a part of the Introduction to Book History by David Finkelstein and Alistair McCleery. This image is "gold star" worthy; it hits my points of interest.

I am essentially looking at the rest of this book hoping that it will further expand on this short insertion of what they think has happened in the last 10 years, or to help me take the next step in discovering how the digital age is changing the book.

For one, does this mean that the print books are really becoming irrelevant and will be removed from mass use in the text 10 to 15 years? if so, what does this mean for book publishers, and book stores? (How does that affect the author?--they wouldn't be able to do book-signing--just readings. How would that effect the authors role in the world of mass production, and an expanding authorship?)

An author always needs someone to promote the book, if book publishers can't sell physical books, could a publisher take the roll of a literary agent and find ways to promote the text or other forms to reproduce the novel (ie movie).

All of these questions I hope to be able to answer or better discuss at the end of the semester.