doctorow at March 8th, 2014 09:03 — #1
winkybber at March 8th, 2014 09:27 — #2
Whilst not commenting on the artistic merit of this, I'd say that it is just as well they are "not for profit". That might not really be a choice.
glitch at March 8th, 2014 09:32 — #3
Good on them for keeping the world's last remaining typewriter repairman in business.
tacochucks at March 8th, 2014 10:24 — #4
Oh I am so in if it is possible next time I am in A2. Thank you for sharing this!
dan_tobias at March 8th, 2014 10:36 — #5
There's always got to be something else that can be given the hipster artisanal treatment...
boundegar at March 8th, 2014 11:10 — #6
Magnificent. I wonder if the poetry is any good?
shuck at March 8th, 2014 11:37 — #7
I'd like to think that these are actually printed out by a computer running an algorithm that throws in random errors, and they're just telling us they're hand-typed. Otherwise this is just a waste of human effort for no purpose except to be perverse. Which provides no benefit in art when you can do the same thing in another way and appear to be perverse.
marjae at March 8th, 2014 11:58 — #8
Why? I don't know the odds, but I worry that this will bring out hand and arm problems in some of the people involved, bringing about chronic pan. which isn't fun. typing hurts. strong Reason Why Not!
backtoyoujim at March 8th, 2014 12:06 — #9
This is a folk art crèche generating contemporary art.
jerwin at March 8th, 2014 12:10 — #10
I'll wait for it to come out my kindle.
mike_robinson at March 8th, 2014 13:47 — #11
As a developer, I'm always suspicious of projects that brag about the technology used to create the product. For example, "Subways in New York visualized with AngularJS, D3, HTML5 Canvas, and Grunt!". It strikes me that truly interesting work rarely cares about the delivery mechanism since the content is the point. I had the same reaction reading about this. Emphasizing the hand-made artistic rejection of the digital age only makes me suspect that the delivery mechanism is more interesting than the content itself.
In short, I don't care how it's made as long as it's interesting.
dumbeast at March 8th, 2014 13:50 — #12
Anybody know what's with the what looks like a sheet of felt behind the paper?
lylehopwood at March 8th, 2014 14:03 — #13
It looks like carbon copy paper! I wonder what the price difference is between buying the top sheet and the carbon copy sheet of the zine? (Assuming I'm right of course.)
Edited to add a link.
dumbeast at March 8th, 2014 14:08 — #14
Damn! Carbon paper. extreme facepalm Makes MUCH more sense than felt. Thanks.
miasm at March 8th, 2014 14:23 — #15
You seem to be going quite well on the unresolved aspect of this part of their art, so I guess they should just leave it as they like it.
wrecksdart at March 8th, 2014 15:04 — #17
I disagree with this to a certain point. Back in the day I had (deep sigh) an Olympia typewriter that I loved using to send letters to friends and family. There is always the ease and certitude of communicating via email or text message, but I found the exercise delightful. For me, there's something wonderful about good paper that's been struck by a typeface--the message is most certainly the most important thing about a letter, but feeling the indents in the back of a typed letter is...just...nice. Likely nostalgic, maybe hipster-ish, but I don't much care.
Ever since I lost the machine in a move I've been trying to think of a way to hook up a daisy-wheel printer to my modern computer system network so that I could have both the longevity of a digital document with the old-world feel of a hand-typed letter. Please note the lack of the word "artisanal" in this post...
robcruickshank at March 8th, 2014 16:18 — #18
Ok, it's time to start acquiring old spirit duplicators and mimeograph machines. And then sell them to the young 'uns. Just let them sniff the paper, and they'll pay anything.
marjae at March 8th, 2014 16:39 — #19
I guess those of us who have disabilities which affect us every moment of every day should just keep quiet lest we offend you.
miasm at March 8th, 2014 17:32 — #20
I certainly hope not. And I definitely didn't extract from your comment that you had disabilities which affected you every day, which I was making light of by questioning the intention of your comment.
It seems to me that deliberately and laboriously constructing something, which may even carry an element of danger, does exist as an idea in the art world.
Sorry if I've offended you but from the context of your original comment it appeared that you were sarcastically concern trolling and I just couldn't grasp the context which would inform me of your intent.
But I do feel it's more of a Canadian Sorry.
marjae at March 8th, 2014 17:48 — #21
but... this could cause hand and arm problems was basically my whole comment, how could you read my comment and miss the whole thing?
next page →