Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The King is Dead, Long Live the New King

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    Per I don t take that view of history. I see the events of history are far more unique than that. That something happened does not mean it was inevitable. For
    Message 1 of 51 , Dec 5, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Per

      I don't take that view of history. I see the events of history are far
      more unique than that. That something happened does not mean it was
      inevitable.

      For instance, what if Morris had not attended the lecture? Would the
      revival have taken place in quite the way it did? Would it have been
      as influential as it turned out to be?

      The young Tschichold happenstance saw an exhibition of Kelmscott books
      in a storefront window and it changed his life. If there was no
      exhibition in the window would his life/career have taken the path it did?

      But we could go on and on with such speculations and they would yield
      us very little.

      At any rate, I'd side more with your colleague's way of thinking.

      All best

      Gerald


      --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Per Werme <per.w@w...> wrote:
      >
      > Gerald
      >
      > Agree on the importance of this lantern slide lecture in London. Now
      > Emery Walker was the guy who re-activated "lettera antica", the roman
      > speaking with a lucid and ingenuous voice. But if he didn't promote
      > it, somebody else would have done, don't you think?
      >
      > I have a colleague persisting in the Janson types would not to be
      > found if Updike didn't brought it from Leipzig back home to US in the
      > early 20th. Rubbish of course, but the pivot man Updike made it
      > public to the American hemisphere. If Updike didn't promote it,
      > somebody else would have . . .
      >
      > Per Werme
      >
      >
    • Gerald Lange
      Per I cut off the last of my post to you by mistake. I think the date of Schöffer s entry into the project is fairly accurate primarily because somewhere was
      Message 51 of 51 , Apr 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Per

        I cut off the last of my post to you by mistake. I think the date of
        Schöffer's entry into the project is fairly accurate primarily because
        somewhere was a reference to his being in Mainz prior to the fall of
        Constantinople (1493), which was of considerable concern to the
        European community.

        Gerald
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.