These styilized shots seeks to show more angles of blindness in archival research. The repitition of shots emphasiszes the repeated efforts of the researcher to pierce the plastic veil seperating them from history. In each shot, the plastic becomes a mirror and the researcher is forced to contemplate themselves, even so, those moments of recursion do not actually allow for a greater understanding of the text - instead it forces them to enact new strategies.
The lights in the archives are very bright and located directly above the tables provided for interaction with archival materials. They dominant the frame in each shot, forcing one to notice, not the manuscript in the archive but the archive itself.
The "zoom" brings us right up to the page, so close we feel like we are touching, but our access is narrowed down through a tiny lens. In some shots being at total "Zoom" is a boon and yet at other times it is a bane.
This view of UCR 008 has been obfuscated by the interaction of camera, plastic venier, archival lighting, and magnifying glass. The resulting footage is an indecipherable mess which I can only say is Latin from having observed the leaf in person. We pause at this moment, as we do in the stylized shots emphasizing archival blindness; here is another point of recursiveness.
Not only are we distanced from this manuscript by space and time and plastic, we are also removed from it by means of interface. Even so, cognizance of this diffuculty proves fruitful in so far as research is concerned. It is important that we pay attention to the impact archival techniques as well as restrictions have upon Manuscript research.
Notice the hole? Medieval's might have noticed it as well but at a less conscious level; a hole would be expected in many cases as the process by which the Vellum is created usually leaves behind holes, tears and other minor imperfections too superficial to render the page unworthy of use.
On the hair side the hole seems smaller, but this shot is also at a differn't distance and angle. Here I sought to demonstrate the absence by holding the manuscript perpendicular to the table and attempting to capture the world on the other side of the leaf through it's hole.
A shot of UCR 006 demonstrates recursion by means of protective medium alone at the archival level. One can also take notice of the suturing that stretches across a series of words like a long jagged scar in the leaf's "flesh". Moments like this also obfusiscate reading. And they also tell of use and history that happened after the manuscript's creation. My wager is that this suturing occured as a result of a tear that came along the folds from frequent and rough use.
This little piece of sawdust, old Vellum, pencil shavings or whatever other material is behind this detritus will linger within the plastic coating surrounding this leaf for some time, it will continue to obfusicate untill we can get the archives to move. And yet it tells a story too, a unique historicity surrounds this little bit of jetsam. I challenge you to take a moment and apply your own hyopthetical narrative to this thing.
