To reassemble two different books in a manner that each second page of one book would be put together with each second page of the other, would result in two volumes of similar weight, though varying in content, both unique in their totality. If every book was to be taken apart and then combined with another, an infinite library of readable or unreadable volumes would emerge, a constellation of non-identical books establishing variant new systems and approximations through juxtaposition and replacement. If we were to imagine all books treated in this way (including their editioned copies), no book would be left untouched or unaltered. Dismantling and deconstructing all books would mean that their initial purpose and origin would be disturbed. There would be no categories; no science or fiction books, no religious writings or educational texts, but one homogeneous volume of books containing another kind of knowledge*. The knowledge found in this library would be vast and infinite, an 'omnium-gatherum' full of cross-references based on chance and the theory of probability**. The purpose of each book would simply be in its very nature, to be a book, containing possibility. There is no assurance that anything written in such book would be true, neither false, as this condition of becoming would be inhuman and coincidential, the authority coming from the book itself. Cencorship would not exist as authorship would no longer be valid.



_______________
* Perhaps such process would lead us to Borges' speculation on the existence of the “Crimson Hexagon”, including a book that contains the log/key of all the other books (as in Jorge Luis Borges, “La Biblioteca de Babel”, 1941).
** In “The Infinite Monkey Theorem“ ’a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will “almost surely” type a particular chosen text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare. In this context, “almost surely“ is a mathematical term with a precise meaning, and the "monkey" is not an actual monkey; rather, it is a metaphor for an abstract device that produces a random sequence of letters ad infinitum. The theorem illustrates the perils of reasoning about infinity by imagining a vast but finite number, and vice versa. The probability of a monkey typing a given string of text as long as, say, Hamlet is so tiny that, were the experiment conducted, the chance of it actually occurring during a span of time of the order of the age of the universe is minuscule but not zero.’ (source Wikipedia)













SKETCH 1: BOOK I (1,2,3) MERGING WITH BOOK II (A,B,C)







SKETCH 1: BOOK I (1,2,3) MERGING WITH BOOK II (A,B,C)









NEXT PAGE