Here's where I'm at so far: The digital reconstruction is a manifestation of something that once was and can no longer be. Doubly removed from the once-whole codex, it is the ghost of what was already a decayed object, an echo of the remanent.
-
-
Because we're hooked on the illusion of positivism, IMO. I have an article coming out on this, but there's a weird shift around WWI where people go from throwing away medieval originals for 19th c. reproductions to melting down medieval metals to repair medieval structures.
-
In the 19 c., the "revival" object *was* medieval in a way we can't think of it now because we need that positivistic separation. Not to put words in her mouth, but I think this is what K. Biddick is railing against when she calls for a return to an 'affective' medieval studies.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's my point! All of this work is re-mediation
-
This digitized MS is part of a history of the facsimile edition. That started in at least the 16th c.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.