11/8 Readings

Hibbett's speech helped me realize how personal the art of translation is. Many translators have an very strong relationship with the original author's they are translating (if they are alive), or at least a deep understanding of not only their work, but their life, education, personality, and beyond. I had not really thought about this previously but it is logical, especially since translators are recreating an author's work with the utmost effort to remain true to it's original essence. Embodying the author and having a profound understanding of who they are would definitely support their ability to produce a more accurate translation. On the other hand, this is why I believe it is also important to have a deep understanding of both of the cultures involved in the translating process, but especially the one of the language you are translating a text into. By catching certain nuances that an ordinary reader may miss, the translator is able to convey and reframe an element of the text that may not come across the right way otherwise. Knowing the author, the cultural context of the text, and the audience that will be consuming the work is highly important.

Unrelated to the above point, I found the following quote interesting: "in the United States, where we have an academic cultural criticism that questions all sorts of established views". This idea speaks to the importance of freedom of speech, diversity, and individuality. If one small group determines what is deemed to be significant, and people are afraid to say otherwise, we lose out on the sharing and challenging of ideas. There is value in being allowed to question "established views" and have a minority opinion, as this creates discussion and allows for growth.

An interesting point in Copeland's article was the following "I wanted to create a perfect equivalent of Shiga’s piece in English—the perfect translation. I was naïve". This speaks to the argument that translation is not a science but an art. No two pieces of work are the same in different languages because of the fundamental differences carried by language, including grammar and sentence structure, but also cultural nuances. There is never really a "universal translation" of a work of writing, because it would be impossible to create a "perfect translation" that satisfied everyone's needs and desires. Every translator has a different understanding of the author, the text, the original culture, the culture of the language the work is being translated into, the audience, and many other minute factors that we do not think about. Additionally, one language may have regional variations, and language itself may evolve over time and outgrow old translations. Considering all of these factors, it is crucial to keep an open mind and remain aware that one's translation of a work is simply one interpretation of the original.

Emma

Book Covers

    I do agree that physical books have gotten more flashy since e-books starting becoming more popular. I had noticed the shift, but just figured it was a trend, but I think it's an interesting comparison to bring up. 

However, I don't think it's an entirely necessary change to be made. Yes, e-books have been getting a lot of praise recently, but I believe there will always be a market for physical media. I can attest to this as someone who enjoys annotating physical books. I personally don't get as much enjoyment from reading digital books because I feel like it robs you of the full experience of reading (i.e. holding the book, turning the page, and seeing your physical progress). It's similar to the way that we have countless streaming platforms and we have a huge collection of music accessible to us for a monthly subscription, yet people still buy and listen to vinyl records and CDs. 

Then, there's the issue of pricing. If their goal is to compete with e-books, then more extravagant book covers feels pretty counterproductive. Those intricate designs usually drive the price of physical books (especially hardcover) way up. Physical books are already more expensive than e-books, making it less desirable to the unbiased consumer, so how could hiking up the price possibly help?

And all of this is also happening while AI is getting increasingly incorporated into everything we produce and consume. It honestly all feels like a money grab, because what I'm seeing right now in the book industry is hiked up prices on books with fancy embellishments on the cover. However, the chances of those coming from an actual artist are becoming lower and lower. If so many publishers are using AI on their covers, then how come the prices are getting higher? They are "saving money" by having a computer generate a cover for them, but not using that lowered production cost to reduce the price of the product.

Madison

11/2 Form VS Content

The article emphasizes how publishers are using more elaborate and beautiful designs to keep physical books competitive in the age of e-books. Its argument seems to be that the more beautiful a book becomes, the more valuable it becomes as a physical object. However, Chip Kidd seems to suggest that book cover design is not always about beauty in the traditional sense. For example, when designing the cover of Dry, he deliberately made the text look as though it had been damaged by water, reflecting the chaos the protagonist's struggle with alcoholism. The cover may not be conventionally beautiful, but it succeeds because of its imperfection.

This makes me wonder whether the value of a physical book comes not necessarily from how beautiful it looks, but from how deeply its form connects with its content. As Kidd suggests, once a book designer reads the story, they become a translator. A designer translates a written story and its emotional experience into a visual narrative, just as a literary translator tries to recreate the experience of the original work for a new audience. The cover is no longer merely decoration but becomes an extension of the content, a “haiku summary” of the story, using a few carefully chosen visual elements to give readers a glimpse of the narrative and invite them to imagine the world within.

Kidd argues that book designers use form to express content while carefully maintaining a balance between the two. But if publishers simply add gold covers, expensive paper, and elaborate printing techniques to increase a book's price, without considering how these elements relate to the story itself, does that beauty become nothing more than another marketing strategy?

Mingzi

Face of the Book

Bosman discusses how making print books worth collecting can encourage readers to choose them over e-books. One example is 1Q84, which comes “wrapped in a translucent jacket with the arresting gaze of a young woman peering through.” The translucent material gives the book a sense of mystery. Bosman notes that the hardcover had sold 95,000 copies, compared with 28,000 e-book copies. Maybe the design had something to do with that. As Julian Barnes puts it at the end of the article, “it has to look like something worth buying and worth keeping.” I found a photo of the book design online:

I completely agree with this idea. But browsing bookstores in the U.S. feels different from browsing bookstores in China. I don’t know if it’s a matter of taste or different target audiences, but honestly, I find a lot of American book covers pretty ugly. I rarely see a cover that makes me want to own the book just for its design. And when I do, it usually costs a ridiculous amount.

I’m all for putting thought into book covers, but I really dislike belly bands, those strips of paper wrapped around books. I see them a lot on books published in China, and they always get in the way when I’m reading, although I do end up using them as bookmarks. They’re often covered with blurbs, awards, sales figures, and endorsements from famous people, telling you how worth reading the book is before you’ve even opened it. Sometimes they cover up the actual cover design, and they slide around or get bent while you’re holding the book. Even when the cover is beautiful, that extra strip can feel unnecessary, unless there’s an actual design idea behind it.

Chip Kidd’s TED Talk was really funny. I loved his question, “What do stories look like?” He’s so creative, and the way he talks about design makes it sound as simple and playful as a game. I especially liked his comparison of a book cover to a haiku of the story. Designing the covers of a comics series so they connect to form a larger image is such a clever idea. It would definitely make people want to collect the whole set. I also liked his idea that a book designer is a kind of translator, turning the written content into something visual. 

Kerry

Covers

     I'm gonna be a bit of a contrarian and say that while I love physical books and would own many more if I were settled down, I honestly don't care much for covers. I can definitely appreciate a good cover or well-designed art, but I can't say it affects my interest in a book's contents much. I'm not sure whether that's more of a personal experience, since I don't tend to be greatly moved by exceptional design in general. Maybe the typical book buyer pays more attention to covers than I do. Listening to Kidd talk about the process behind some of his work was entertaining, but I'm not sure it was especially interesting (apart from maybe learning that this guy created the Jurassic Park logo).

    As an aside, I was a bit bothered that Bosman didn't tell us what an endpaper is in the second paragraph, only to explain it later. I'd already looked it up by then :(

winter

Book Covers

 The only thought coming out of these two was just that I understand the assessment. Especially with the internet and how media seems to be shifting into shorter spans of information, it only makes sense that book covers would need to adapt to the new atmosphere. The video was definitely where the idea stemmed from, being published 14 years ago, and there is a line between the thoughts of the speaker and Bosman’s observations now. I’m just unsure of how much of a difference it will make. I do agree that these changes in books and their first impression will draw more attention than they have been, but that relies on people coming across them in the first place. With all the other options to spend your attention on, it feels as if one would have to seek out books with the intention to discover these new covers rather than just happen upon them. Then again, there is a reason that books have remained for so long. Perhaps these new covers can help a new audience discover, or rediscover, books. I’m not really sure what conclusions to draw from this, but it’s interesting at the very least. 

Avi

Book Covers and Art

I find it really interesting that the strategy behind creating artistic and appealing book covers was a result of the rising and competing popularity of e-books. This idea of physical beauty becoming more important to the consumer really made me think of the effects of AI on other art forms. While AI provides us with convenience on a scale never known before, gradually, people are getting sick of it. Personally, I hate seeing AI commercials and flyers. I have definitely noticed an uptick of the public preferring work that is uniquely and obviously human, whether through its creative direction or physical qualities or something that obviously demonstrates some kind of process. Just recently, Studio Laika released a new claymation film and Prada produced a commercial that was almost entirely animated by hand. Certainly, I imagine this is the case for book covers in this modern age, too. I am certainly drawn to books that are aesthetically pleasing and are more unique and thought-provoking. For instance, I recently purchased these books by Clarice Lispector (a Brazilian novelist) because I liked the continuity across the all of her novels' covers. Anyway, I hope this trend through book covers and art in general continues.

Kenna

This is what the covers of Lispector's novels look like.