I have to apologize that I have not been writing for a while. I have been sick and sleeping was just more important to me. Today I am presenting you with my graduate class journal entry for this week just so you know what else I have been up to. I have changed references to my professor so you are not too lost.
Journal Weekend 2
We started the weekend with a lecture on preservation technologies and the question of reversibility. If we have certain technologies at our disposal at this time do we need to use them? Our professor, Randy Silverman, passed around samples of Barrow Lamination which helped me to see what this lamination process looks like as opposed to reading about it in Preservation of Libraries and Archives by Shahani and Wilson. It was very interesting to see that the lamination process was nothing like what we are used to (I noticed that the sheets were in numerical order and was wondering if the process used two copies to make one lamination. I think that I may have read somewhere that this was the particular process). Although this process was said to be reversible by soaking in acetone some are wary at ever putting those papers through that process for fear it may after so many years actually damage it.
United States shifted interest into the preservation of information through microfilming and now digitization. Many original newspapers, journals and books have been lost in the process whether due to the original microfilming process or due to libraries dumping their copies because they have a roll of microfilm to replace the cluttered shelves. The problem is that some of these microfilms are incomplete due to missing pages or in the case of newspapers whole editions and others were shot out of focus making it difficult to read. Not to mention that microfilm was black and white which did not allow for colored prints to be allowed full justice. And even though microfilming seems like a cost effective endeavor the shooting, processing and indefinite storage of the film may cost more in the long run.
This cost is also applying itself to the forming digitization projects that are sweeping the preservation community. Digitization is the one form of preservation that will have to be constantly handled and updated to changing software and hardware formats. The digitization of material is also dependent on multiple systems to prevent loss due to electronic failure. At this time nobody knows how much this will cost. In class our professor mentioned that the Library of Congress is giving grants for newspaper digitization projects as long as the digitization is done from original microfilm. An institution can only use the original newspaper if there is no microfilm or the microfilm in intelligible. It begs the question as to why institutions cannot start over with the original document to ensure that the quality and for that matter the search systems used with digitization are the best they can be.
Our professor presented an extended look at a German firm (ZFB) that is working on preservation of materials that include splitting and reinforcing pages, fixing holes with matching cellulose and even bleaching paper to look like new, among other techniques. These processes are all very wonderful, but they are not reversible. With the added benefit of making the old look new again, which a lot of people are against. Our professor brought up how people were upset when they cleaned the Sistine Chapel that reminded me of how my mother’s employer got mad when she cleaned certain items in the pub in England, because they were supposed to look old. Although some of ZFB’s processes are not reversible it does allow for the original work to be kept longer.
Saturday focused on the actual book. Bookbinding was addressed and we all had the opportunity to work on our own Ethiopian book. I was a very interesting process that I am sure I will not remember how to replicate. I have tried Japanese stab binding in a workshop before and have found that the hands-on work is the best way to understand the process and the work behind creating a book. I was very interested to learn that the cording on the spines of old books due to the process of sewing the books together.
We also learned about publisher’s bindings, which I was personally hopeless at identifying. Yet this concept of publisher’s bindings and the preservation of the entire book is another question that needs to be addressed. In the article Evidence in Hand this issue is brought up as a concept of many parts making a whole. Different people want a book for different reasons. One researcher may just be interested in the information, another in the typeface, another in the pictures and the process of printing those pictures, another may be interested in the printing as compared to other dates even country printings and still another researcher may be looking at the binding of the book. Then the question is if the book is rebound will it change and is that important.
The preservationist’s ultimate dilemma is how to preserve an item without doing more damage.
