A comparison between Gutenberg & Ars Moriendi (a block book example)

Left: Gutenberg Bible - Right: Ars Moriendi (Block Book)

Comparison Questions:

What was the target audience for each of these books?

The 'Gutenberg Bible' was intended for the public, Christians in particular. Whereas 'Ars Moriendi' was a book for the dying people - "inspiration against despair".... advice on the protocols and procedures for a good death.

How are the images and texts arranged on the page in each example? (as you consider this question remember that any images in copies in the Gutenberg Bible were added by hand after the book was made).

The Gutenberg Bible text was presented in two columns. Capitals separating new paragraphs and illustration decorating the margins, spreading out from illustrated capital letters. Some capitals are framed. Sometimes the margins hold heavily illustrated vines winding down the margins and in between the columns to decorate the page. These done by hand.

In Ars Moriendi, the illustrations are quite detailed and are from wood cut blocks. A frame has been cut to enclose the image. The text in a banner at the bottom of the illustrated page as well as whole pages of text in one column.

How did the technology used affect the visual appearance of both words and images?

In relation to the Gutenberg Bible, technology bought Vellum paper to manuscripts and books. A better quality of paper to be using. Books were bound in codex by then. The images later added by hand. In Ars Moriendi the woodcut blocks were used for both text and images. A quicker pace of production was in place. yet the quality wasn't as good as hand painted art/illustrations.

What can you say about the role of and relationship between word and text in these particular books?

Ars Moriendi had whole page illustrations and then whole pages of text. There were banners of text at the foot of each image and again on small wispy banners throughout the image. And yet... the text and illustration seem in distinctly different categories. There is imagery and then there is text. And I suppose the use of woodcut blocks would ensure this.....

The Gutenberg Bible on the other hand has hand drawn illustrations throughout the book. The decorative illustrations weave in and around and over the text, emphasising the text or decorating the page..... the relationship between text and illustration seems more incorporated with each other. It presents as a whole - inclusive of both word and text. Not just - Word and then Text.

Who had the greatest responsibility for the visual appearance of books such as these?

I think the hand drawn artist had the most responsibility for their books, such as in the Gutenberg Bible. They had to draw and incorporate both the elements of text and illustration into a whole integrated work. They couldn't make mistakes as they were often being commissioned for the work. The block book of the Ars Moriendi was produced by woodcut blocks for both text and imagery...... the text already cut, the illustration already cut..... they need only be concerned mostly with alignment.

Do you consider either of these to be art? Why, or why not?

I think both could be considered art. There is a lot of time and energy and artistry that has gone into the woodcut blocks as well as the hand drawn illustration. Both books as a whole piece though are still very creative and artistic. To me, I would consider them art. They carry with them the movements and artistic trends of the time over numerous regions...... and from this have created further illustration and documentation.... so yes. They are art.