For today’s post, I’m once again referring to The Cambridge Companion to Textual Scholarship, which is great because it means I don’t have to go traipsing around the library again. It’s half 9 in the morning and I haven’t finished my coffee yet. I do not want to move. Today, I’ll be reading Michael G. Sargent’s piece on Manuscript Textuality (See Appendix D).
“Around the world, people have been writing – producing visual records of spoken language and ideas – for about five thousand years. The media of representation have ranged from drawing or pressing with a stylus on a clay tablet to scratching on shells, bone, stone, tree bark, or wood, to painting or inscription with a brush, a pencil or pen on stone, on wood panels, bamboo strips, tree leaves, papyrus, vellum, paper, or cloth, to the impression of characters on an ink surface onto a medium such as paper (printing) or the impression of a medium onto a clean surface into which characters or images have been mechanically or chemically inscribed (etching, lithography), to the electronic production of a text on a screen. All forms of writing that depend on manual production of characters – the actual copying out of texts by hand – share a number of characteristics of production and transmission that we think of manuscript textuality.” (Sargent 224)
So, in the spirit of manuscript textuality, I’m going to write the rest of today’s post by hand.
* I pause here because I have to go and give a presentation on “The Monstrous in Art”, then go and mentor some peers, then go to work. But I will return!
… It’s half four. I have given my presentation (which turned out to be roughly three times the length it was meant to be. I’ve never been called out for talking too much before), mentored my kids (who have now added me to their group chat, I’ve never felt so accepted) and done a shift at work, so I’m hungry and grumpy. It’s pancake day. I have no pancakes. God is dead.