I'm manhandling historical artifacts!

[Dr. Cherry Gunn]

And they're letting me.



At our county courthouse downtown, they have an exhibit of historical books and papers of significance to American history and philosophical thought. The unique thing about the exhibit is, you can pick up and read any of the works. It's pretty amazing, and put on by an organization that buys these in order to have these hands-on experiences all over the country: the Remnant Trust.



http://www.jg.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070919/LOCAL/709190318



A list of some of the books, for those who don't want to read the story in our local paper linked above.



• John Adams, Defence of the Constitution, 1788

• Articles of Confederation, 1782

• Plato's Apology, 1675

• Martin Luther, Sermon on Usury, 1520

• David Crockett's Sketches, 1834

• Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase Message to Congress, 1803

• Monroe Doctrine, 1823

• The Connecticut Ratification Printing of the U.S. Constitution, 1788





Those dates are the actual publication dates of the books/pamphlets I was touching. 1520! I also touched a signed 1776 printing of Common Sense, a first edition English translation of Democracy in America, and one of Noah Webster's original books on American literature.



Man, what a great exhibit. I'm thinking of going back this evening for one last touch.

[Black Angel]

I hope you're wearing cotton gloves or something...doesn't our skin's acid eventually breakdown paper?

This also reminds me of when we went to Sri Lanka and toured a museum where a friendly guide decided to take us around (for a small tip later of course)... At one point we were looking at a stone, similar to the Rosetta stone, that allowed them to translate from Sanscrit to Tamil which was really old. He says (and does) 'this stone here, very old (touch, rub), more than one thousand years (rub, rub, touch, touch), very important (touch, pat)'. Coopers and I were freaking out by the end. They have very different ideas on conservation of antiquities over there...

[Dr. Cherry Gunn]

I hope you're wearing cotton gloves or something...doesn't our skin's acid eventually breakdown paper?

This also reminds me of when we went to Sri Lanka and toured a museum where a friendly guide decided to take us around (for a small tip later of course)... At one point we were looking at a stone, similar to the Rosetta stone, that allowed them to translate from Sanscrit to Tamil which was really old. He says (and does) 'this stone here, very old (touch, rub), more than one thousand years (rub, rub, touch, touch), very important (touch, pat)'. Coopers and I were freaking out by the end. They have very different ideas on conservation of antiquities over there...

As I said, the point of this exhibit is to be able to touch the books, feel them, and read them. They know they're going to wear eventually, but not noticeably fast, and they'd rather they be used to inspire rather than sit in a vacuum-sealed box to be viewed from afar. It's a bold vision, perhaps controversial in some corners, but I like it. It really does give the history a sense of context when you can interact with it.

[Northcott]

As I said, the point of this exhibit is to be able to touch the books, feel them, and read them. They know they're going to wear eventually, but not noticeably fast, and they'd rather they be used to inspire rather than sit in a vacuum-sealed box to be viewed from afar. It's a bold vision, perhaps controversial in some corners, but I like it. It really does give the history a sense of context when you can interact with it.


Still, it would be a great shame if this lead to such works disappearing from the world. Are electronic copies being made of these, or have they already been made? Some of it sounds like it would be fascinating historical reading.

[Varaj]

This is one subject I think I have come to terms with the fact that most of the world is crazy. The information contained in those texts is exactly the same as the information contained in one printed today. There is nothing special about the fact it is old.

[FeatsofClay]

This is one subject I think I have come to terms with the fact that most of the world is crazy. The information contained in those texts is exactly the same as the information contained in one printed today. There is nothing special about the fact it is old.

I have to disagree here. (sorta) The information is the same but there is something special. The presence and (to my distaste) the handling of these pieces bring a stronger sense of the age and relevance of the information. Telling someone "1774" or "1164" isn't nearly as effective or powerful as presenting them with original objects.

[Varaj]

I have to disagree here. (sorta) The information is the same but there is something special. The presence and (to my distaste) the handling of these pieces bring a stronger sense of the age and relevance of the information. Telling someone "1774" or "1164" isn't nearly as effective or powerful as presenting them with original objects.

I'll start a new thread on this craziness. http://www.kaytastrophe.com/vb/showthread.php?p=15410#post15410

[Northcott]

This is one subject I think I have come to terms with the fact that most of the world is crazy. The information contained in those texts is exactly the same as the information contained in one printed today. There is nothing special about the fact it is old.

Ideally. Let's stretch this back further, to older documents that have had a much wider effect on the human race: look at the controversy over interpretations and translations of the Bible and the Koran. Maintaining the integrity of an original copy can pay off in the long run. Primary source documents from the middle ages are priceless to historians, as they allow for re-examinations of the facts in the context with which they were originally written with no fear of mistranslation, printing errors, etc.

That value set aside, there's one other possible angle. This isn't intended as a dig in the slightest, but is this sentiment akin to why you don't perceive why people get creeped out by movies?

[Varaj]

Ideally. Let's stretch this back further, to older documents that have had a much wider effect on the human race: look at the controversy over interpretations and translations of the Bible and the Koran. Maintaining the integrity of an original copy can pay off in the long run. Primary source documents from the middle ages are priceless to historians, as they allow for re-examinations of the facts in the context with which they were originally written with no fear of mistranslation, printing errors, etc.

That value set aside, there's one other possible angle. This isn't intended as a dig in the slightest, but is this sentiment akin to why you don't perceive why people get creeped out by movies?

http://www.kaytastrophe.com/vb/showthread.php?p=15425#post15425

[Northcott]

D'oh! Too little sleep, too quick fingers!

[Freedom Canadian]

Still, it would be a great shame if this lead to such works disappearing from the world. Are electronic copies being made of these, or have they already been made?

They're not necessarily the only copies in existence. In fact, it would be surprising if they were, in fact.

I like the whole thing. It's neat. :)

[Northcott]

They're not necessarily the only copies in existence. In fact, it would be surprising if they were, in fact.

I like the whole thing. It's neat. :)

I never rule out crass stupidity as a potential cause of the destruction or loss of valuables. :)

[Black Angel]

As I said, the point of this exhibit is to be able to touch the books, feel them, and read them. They know they're going to wear eventually, but not noticeably fast, and they'd rather they be used to inspire rather than sit in a vacuum-sealed box to be viewed from afar. It's a bold vision, perhaps controversial in some corners, but I like it. It really does give the history a sense of context when you can interact with it.

I wasn't suggesting not touching them, only that wearing cotton gloves might be more appropriate to maintain the longevity of these apparently important works. You can still do all of the above, although the 'feeling' may be more muted, and then they will still be in great condition for generations down the track.


PS I'm not getting in to the argument about the value of old vs reproduction. I'm just talking about maintaining old...

[Dr. Cherry Gunn]

I wasn't suggesting not touching them, only that wearing cotton gloves might be more appropriate to maintain the longevity of these apparently important works. You can still do all of the above, although the 'feeling' may be more muted, and then they will still be in great condition for generations down the track.


PS I'm not getting in to the argument about the value of old vs reproduction. I'm just talking about maintaining old...

Yeah, gloves are pretty standard in libraries I think, and that's fine too. I'm not a pro-skin-oil nut, I just enjoyed the experience. :)

[Pigs in Space]

I'm interested to know if the book from the 1520's was hard to read?

I mean what was the english like? Shakespearian?

[Dr. Cherry Gunn]

I'm interested to know if the book from the 1520's was hard to read?

I mean what was the english like? Shakespearian?

It was written in German, so it was very hard to read. :D

[The Winslow]

Ach! Zu schwer für Sie? Deutsche ist einfach! :tongue:

(Just gimme Internet access for online dictionaries, good paper monolingual and bilingual dictionaries for when teh web fails, and one half-hour per sentence...)

[Pigs in Space]

It was written in German, so it was very hard to read. :D

Fuckin' Luther. What an ass. You'd think he'd have the guts to schizm the church in a proper fucking language.


So what, you were literally just touching them, not reading them?

I was kind of under the impression it might have been an english translation anyway.

Were any of them readable?

[Harry]

I get tired of Izrador and his apologists claiming that he's been perma-banned here, so here's a bumpity-bump to disprove one more right-wing lie used to rile up people and garner false outrage.

hth

[Lady Fury]

I was wondering about that. I was going to go looking but then I got distracted by my farm on FB.:o

[Dacke]

Is there anyone other than Bullitt (and spambots) who's perma-banned?

[Harry]

Here is the admin post that commented on Iz-bot's two-week suspension:

http://www.kaytastrophe.com/vb/showpost.php?p=28737&postcount=34

... which followed, of course, a period of heavy trolling. Kay's has never been too terribly appreciative of that behavior. Some, sure, but not the constant Iz-bot trolls. Shortly after this, GG stopped posting, Izzy went away, and both started simply lurking. They don't sign in any longer, but they still read here on occasion.

[Brynja]

What Harry said.


edit: in fact let me go check right now.

edit to the edit: I looked in the admin panel. He is not perma-banned. It was a limited time "go cool off" near as I can garner from reading older threads.

[Brynja]

Bullitt is perma-banned to answer your question Dacke yes, and I do believe he is the only one. I would however defer to Bella or Varaj if they chimed it in more current info.

[Dayknight]

Fuckin' Luther. What an ass. You'd think he'd have the guts to schizm the church in a proper fucking language.

German is a good language for a revolution though! It gives a certain "depth" to anger.

[Redallia]

I'm afraid I'm terribly confused about what prompted the bump of this three year old thread.

[Brynja]

Got me I am just the happy information lady.

[Dacke]

I'm afraid I'm terribly confused about what prompted the bump of this three year old thread.
Wil (here known as Dr Cherry Gunn) claimed to be permabanned here over at CM. Trainz said "Not to my knowledge", and went here to bump the thread where he got tempbanned as evidence.

[Redallia]

Ahh...well, that would explain it then, wouldn't it! Thanks for being so helpful!

[Pigs in Space]

Cross board infighting yay!


Anyone who vists CM is a pedo!