Links on printing, format, etc.

Most of these resources were compiled by Courtney Jacobs, Special Collections librarian at UNT. Courtney recommends that you watch two of the videos below before we meet on 10/4: "From Punch to Printing Type" and "The Anatomy of the Book, Pt. 1." This later is particularly useful for illustrating the discussion of format in Greetham.   

The Book as a Technology

The Medieval Helpdesk

The Atlas of Early Printing

Freely available videos

Bookbinding (sewing on cords): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BScrCpPtGPs

Intaglio (copper plate engraving): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQvghHs15hA

Fine art copper plate printing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEcTWa6aA9M

How to tell the difference between illustration types (engraving, woodblock, etc.):  http://collation.folger.edu/2012/02/woodcut-engraving-or-what/
Papermaking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3PfwOItto

Oxford University Making of a Book (source for modern practices, include type casting): http://thespecialistcollections.tumblr.com/post/127804489249/the-oxford-university-press-archive-has-made

Stephen Fry’s The Machine that made us (on Gutenburg and his inventions): http://www.veoh.com/watch/v18714625RMJnrG8x

A very brief video featuring presswork and binding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T17aCX2iBBY

Book Binding from 1961 (sewing, marbling, gold-stamping): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1Sj4lRVqJc

Terrible Bookmaking video (but includes linotype and stereotyping): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBztGX-2i1M

Videos on Demand:

How to Operate a Book: https://vod.library.unt.edu/cat_vodentry.php?film=881

*From Punch to Printing Type: https://vod.library.unt.edu/cat_vodentry.php?film=880

*The Anatomy of a Book Pt 1, Format in the Hand Press Period: https://vod.library.unt.edu/cat_vodentry.php?film=879

The Making of a Renaissance Book: http://vod.library.unt.edu/film.php

Controlled Vocabularies

Etherington & Roberts descriptive terminology on bookbinding and conservation : http://cool.conservation-us.org/don/don.html

Carter’s ABC for Book Collectors: https://www.ilab.org/eng/documentation/29-abc_for_book_collectors.html

Format Resources:

Book Sizes Chart: http://www.trussel.com/books/booksize.htm

Here is the LibGuide for ENG5750 (not very useful but we can expand it if you have things to add?):http://guides.library.unt.edu/c.php?g=531512

Additions and Alternatives to Darnton's Communications Circuit

Darnton, "What is the History of Books? Revisited"
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3403039/darnton_revisited.pdf?sequence=2

The Grub Street Project, "Print Culture as a Distributed Social Network"
http://grubstreetproject.net/distributednetwork.php

Thomas Adams and Nicholas Barker, "A New Model for the study of the book"
summarized here: https://davidjgary.com/2013/02/05/summary-of-adams-and-barker-a-new-model-for-the-study-of-the-book/

Digital Communication Circuit:
http://www.bookunbound.stir.ac.uk/research/infographic/

"The Communication Circuit Revisited"
http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/wgbw/research/Weel_Articles/CommsCircuitRevd.pdf

Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years & The War Years

I believe Sandburg's biography of Abraham Lincoln, Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years and the War years, emphasizes the social nature of print. Throughout the book, he uses manuscripts of Lincoln's own personal writings (letters, speeches, professional documents, diary entries, etc.) to paint a very specific portrait of Lincoln's persona. "Every biographer," he says, "is under compulsion to omit all or parts of Lincoln letters and speeches that he would like to include; this in part explains why any Lincoln biography is different from any or all other... Supposing all could be told, it would take a far longer time to tell than it was taken to enact in life."

In the preface to the single volume edition written in May of 1954, Carl Sandburg discusses the evolution of his work since it was first published in the early 1920's. Initially a six-volume edition, Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years was Sandburg's attempt "to make a certain portrait of Abraham Lincoln... as the country lawyer and prairie politician." After it's publication, he had become so enamored with Lincoln that he went on to write a four-volume book called The War Years. Twenty-eight years after his initial publication, Sandburg condensed them all into a single volume. Despite having what must have seemed like an endless amount of text to work with when attempting to condense the material, he acknowledges that he also "made use of such new materials and researches as throw added light on the life and personality of Lincoln." This highlights the fluid nature of how texts are created, specifically when they are based on a variety of manuscripts that weren't intended to be released to the public. Sandburg's book highlights how his recreation of a man's identity was based on a biased selection of texts that operates not under a regulated, authoritative system, but on the social distribution of ideas and documents that change over time.

Paradise Lost

Paradise Lost by John Milton

                After reading the articles assigned I found hard time understanding the term “social nature” through which a book undergo to appear in the last form the reader is holding.  Therefore, it was hard form my to find a contemporary book that had experienced a variety of printing mechanisms or change in the apparatus of editing and bibliography. Then I thought of narrowing my search to something old that it was written in manuscript and new that it was printed. After struggle with what to choose I picked up Paradise Lost which after looking at different versions was the typical example that would satisfy or speak to the “social nature” of a manuscript or a book. The great feature about the book I choose is that it brings the discourse of what happened to variety of versions that were published and what kind of errors the copy text has. The name of the book is “Paradise Lost: A Poem Written in Ten Books” An Authoritative Text of the 1667 First Edition which was Transcribed and edited with commentary by John T. Shawcross and Michael Lieb. The transcription of the book is from a copy owned by the Newberry Library which was checked against facsimiles (XVI). The first addition had a number of issues when it comes to changes or the lack of them. For instance, line numbers are given on the right side of the text rather than on the alternative right left sides of the page (377). Harris F. Fletcher’s facsimile edition of Paradise lost is a copy of the 1669 rather than 1667 version, but it shows the reissues and changes made through the various versions occurring between these two dates. The work has as part of new machinery an electronic edition of the 1667 edition as a facsimile. Moreover, in the second edition of the work Milton adds a total of 15 lines which changes the order of the books. The changes that take a place during that period of time is not limited to the changes that Milton himself does, but also to changes that readers might or might not know its source. The first edition, for example, was issued six times during three years in which the title page changes in ever issuance (392). Another example of what social nature could do to a book is the added preliminary material ,1668-69 such as statement from the printer which changed over time as well(419). To summaries the resetting and the second printing of the preliminary materials in 1669 resulted in a variety of alterations (in spacing, linage and non-significant type of font). These alterations proves that the compositor of the second addition is different from the first and was reflecting his style.

Here is an Electronic Version of  Paradise Lost:

http://iii.library.unt.edu/record=b5529661~S12

Milton, John, John T. Shawcross, and Michael Lieb. Paradise Lost: A Poem Written in Ten Books. Pittsburgh, Pa:       Duquesne University Press, 2007. Print.

Bodleian First Folio

In looking for something that “exemplifies the social nature of print or manuscript ‘publication’,” I began thinking about the numerous works that touch on the publication cycle in early modern England. These discuss the variety of people that had a hand in printing Shakespeare. I thought about works like Double Falsehood, ostensibly a collaboration across time of Lewis Theobald (in the early eighteenth century) and Shakespeare and John Fletcher (a contemporary and known collaborator of Shakespeare’s). This case seems aligned to the kinds of problems Darnton is talking about, but maybe only in a very broad, general way.

So, yet again, I find myself at the First Folio. The First Folio and its publication are very social in nature, and specifically the copy in the Bodleian Library at Oxford. The First Folio itself was published seven years after Shakespeare’s death, removing any control he himself may have had over the works and their publication – a circumstance that Johns points out with Brahe. Authorship of Shakespeare’s plays was, however, communal in many ways because the plays technically belonged to the company and the publisher (one of whom, in this case, was a bookseller). This speaks more, I think, of a different conception of authorship than we have today. The Bodleian First Folio, however, is interesting because it has escaped restoration and rebinding. The Bodleian acquired it at publication, but it was sold off in the 1660s and not bought back until the early twentieth century. This edition bears the markings of reader interactions with the text, preserved through its lack of restoration. The Bodelian’s web site says that, “[i]ts unique marks of wear connect us with the tastes of early readers, and we can see how their hands have worn the pages of Romeo and Juliet almost to shreds, while leaving King John virtually pristine.” While, as Darnton says, “reading remains mysterious” and “texts shape the response of readers,” here we can see how readers have physically shaped the text, and potentially shaped the reception of some of its parts over others.

This edition, too, is being shaped by modern "printing" technologies. It is viewable online in high-resoultion to be flipped through from the comfort of your PC, Mac, or laptop, and who knows what effects that publication decision will have on the rest of the circuit of tees text.

You can view the Bodelian's First Folio here and get more info about it here.

The Common Reader

In her Common Reader series, Virginia Woolf remarks upon life and literature throughout a compilation of essays, many of which originally appeared in publications such as Vogue, The Nation, and the Times Literary Supplement. The second part of the Common Reader series, this specific book was published in 1932 by Virginia herself, along with her husband Leonard, at the Hogarth Press, 52 Tavistock Square in London. It is the “second impression” of the first edition, printed by R. & R. Clark, Ltd. in Edinburgh.

The Hogarth Press venture originally began as a hobby when the Woolfs were living in Richmond, later becoming a source of supplemental income and a therapeutic, tactile alternative to the stresses of Virginia’s writing. I found the link between Tycho Brahe’s singular printing endeavor and the Woolfs’ publishing venture to be interesting. Darton, Johns, and Ezell all question the “fixity” of print, and it is Johns specifically who argues that “printed texts were not intrinsically trustworthy. When they were in fact trusted, it was only as a result of hard work” (p. 284). The phenomenon of publishing and printing your own written work (although this particular copy wasn’t printed by the Woolfs themselves) eliminates the variables that would be possible in a typical “communications circuit” (i.e. Darnton), but perhaps only to a certain extent.

The fact that the Woolfs published and printed much of Virginia’s writing does not undermine the idea of “publication” being primarily social in nature (and I would argue that their doing so is, in fact, "social" to the core). Publication is merely a part of the communications circuit. On the title page of The Common Reader – Second Series, Virginia presents a quote by Dr. Johnson in Life of Gray: “…I rejoice to concur with the common reader; for by the common sense of readers, uncorrupted by literary prejudices, after all the refinements of subtilty and the dogmatism of learning, must be generally decided all claim to poetical honours.” It is the reader who truly completes the communications circuit, who is responsible for interpreting signs to create meaning, and who ultimately must determine the veracity of the methods by which those signs were produced.  

Life of Norman

I’m about to get really far out on this social construct thing, but I’d like to examine the creation of a crowdsourced novel/linked short story anthology via the Reddit subreddit: “Life of Norman” (https://www.reddit.com/r/lifeofnorman/).  There’s an “about” section found on the lower right of the page link that details the basics of Norman’s character, the world he lives in, and the ways his story should be told (3rd-person omniscient; suggested 500-word limit per story). From this same section, I can see that the site was created three years ago by a user named MaximusLeonis. A search for the user’s comments on this subreddit show that they created “Life of Norman” on a whim and were surprised by its popularity (https://www.reddit.com/r/lifeofnorman/comments/1cm39f/meta_wow_what_an_immediate_and_awesome_response/?). As of today, there are over 54,000 subscribers, though it’s hard to say how many are active contributors.

It appears that the founding user no longer moderates this page, and there are three current moderators listed in the “about” section, one of which, MattressCrane (who is also a contributor), is in the process of compiling an anthology of Norman stories. He asks for permission to do so in this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/lifeofnorman/comments/2b653j/id_like_to_compile_normans_stories_into_an_ebook/?, dated two years ago (exact dates are not available). MatressCrane’s latest update regarding this project can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/lifeofnorman/comments/52u22t/the_book_of_norman_the_time_hasalmost_finally/ . As of today, this link is dated as “7 days ago”, and the link includes a final list of the usernames attached to each contributing writer.

A search of MattressCrane’s posts in the Norman subreddit reveal roughly thirteen updates on the bookmaking process between the two years that separate the links above. While the book manuscript is now finalized and awaiting publication (with all proceeds to benefit Cats Cradle animal shelter in Victoria, British Colombia, Canada [https://www.reddit.com/r/lifeofnorman/comments/3yuh6v/the_book_of_norman_the_final_update/], users continue to contribute new stories about Norman and the characters in his life on a daily basis. There is even a spinoff subreddit for Norman’s coworker/love interest, Lisa: https://www.reddit.com/r/LifeOfLisa. By upvoting or downvoting stories about Norman (or by awarding them virtual gold coins purchased with actual currency; i.e. gilding, users effectively decide which stories become canonical, and which do not.  Users can also actively discuss the specifics of Norman's life and character by tagging such posts as "[META]". 

The Portable Enlightenment Reader & Accessibility

Whilst reading the material for 9/22, especially with the concern of coming up with a text that exemplifies the social nature of print or manuscript publication, my thoughts continuously drifted to the need for fast paced materials in today’s society. Furthermore, it is not uncommon for society to crave quite a bit of information in a condensed form. These thoughts are what helped me choose my example for this class, which is my e-reader version of “The Portable Enlightenment Reader” edited by Isaac Kramnick. Firstly, I want to talk about the book itself. “The Portable Enlightenment Reader” was first published in 1995, far after the contents of the book were initially written, but as Kramnick states in his introduction, this work attempts to present a “rough guide [that] would emphasize the hundred-plus years from the 1680s to the 1790s.” Rather than considering how the material in this anthology, such as “The New Science” by Francis Bacon was initially presented to the reader, I want to focus on the publication of this anthology, and the purpose it serves. As Darnton finishes his essay with, “books do not merely recount history, they make it.” My reasoning for arguing that “The Portable Enlightenment” is historically important as a text starts with the information it holds. There are numerous enlightenment publications within this anthology, and for the great price of XYZ, you can have them all in your library. It is ironic, because upon owning this work, you have a portable version of the enlightenment, and I believe that really speaks to 20th and 21st century students/scholars/anybody who reads (we are all really students, aren’t we? I digress.) To make this even more 21st century friendly, my personal copy of “The Portable Enlightenment Reader” is located in the Kindle app on my iPad, as well as phone. I, as well as countless other people, take my phone with me pretty much everywhere I go. This brings a whole new meaning to portable that Kramnick might not have even thought of when he first published this anthology in 1995. I believe that the social nature of publication is continuously changing. My example of “The Portable Enlightenment Reader” touches base on how today’s society wants a lot of information in one place, and for things to be easily reached.

An Illustrated Companion to Edgar Allan Poe

From the moment you pick up the book Edgar Allan Poe: An Illustrated Companion to His Tell-Tale Stories, it is evident that it is in some way concerned with the history of Poe's texts and the process by which these texts came to be. In a text banner above the title are the words "With removable memorabilia including handwritten letters, drafts, and more". When you read through this book you are indeed getting a great deal of biographical information on Poe, answering some of the questions that Darnton says we should be posing about the author including his relationship to his patron and how Poe dealt with publishers, printers, and reviewers. The book is also concerned with the way that the texts looked in their original manuscript versions, what some of his texts would have looked like on the printed page, and what Poe thought of their printing. Ultimately though what I find it to be most concerned with is the reader and chronicling how Poe has been read over time. This book does not only mention the manuscripts, letters, marriage certificates, etc. but it provides full transcriptions in its index and also actual material copies of these things that the reader can take out of envelopes and examine in their hands. This of course would change how the reader interacts with Poe's texts, but also give them key information about the author and his texts. In the Preface the book (incidentally written and edited by a distant cousin of Poe himself) posits itself as a helpful aid to those that have only been reading Poe as a macabre figure. The book examines how Griswold, one of Poe’s editors and critics, changed the way we now read Poe because of Griswold’s interactions with Poe. Even in the acknowledgments it is interesting to examine how this version of the letters, manuscripts, and text came to be through the passing down of artifacts (letters kept by other members of the Poe family, the Poe museum, etc.). This book, though examining the history of Poe’s texts and publications, is also a fascinating textual artifact itself.  

Nicholas Culpeper

Nicholas Culpeper (1616 – 1654) was a physician, herbalist, botanist, and astrologer. He was radical for his time because he believed in using common herbs, examining patients for free and using astrology to help poor people back to health.  His book The English Physician, was purposefully sold cheaply and incidently was used by the colonists in North America. His book The Complete Herbal, is in print to this day.

Nicholas believed medicine was a “public asset” rather than a commercial one. His work and books had a significant social impact on the people of London.  Culpeper’s his outspoken remarks about physicians, priests and lawyers, lead to him being accused of witchcraft by the Society of Apothecaries.  This resulted in him joining a local military unit as a battlefield surgeon during the English Civil War (1643). Unfortunately he sustained a serious chest injury and returned to London. 

His first medical book A Physical Directory, or a Translation of the London Directory - translation of the Pharmacopoeia Londonesis of the Royal College of Physicians was published in 1649.  The 1651 edition, printed by Peter Cole, at the sign of the Printing Press in Cornhill near the Royal Exchange is available online through a Digital Humanities project by the Hathi Trust. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=osu.32435018075440;view=1up;seq=8 .  This book provided a comprehensive list and instructions for medicines made by apothecaries for physicians.  The Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership has actually transcribed the book into modern terms. This can be accessed at this URL http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=eebo;idno=A35390.0001.001

It is rather ironic that a man who has been dead for over 360 years composed books that are available and at least one remains in use to this day.  His works improved the lives of common people in both England and America.  Physical printers have continued to make these books available through the centuries and online ‘printers’ have made them even more accessible.  As I have not actually examined many of the editions available, I cannot comment on the credibility and reliability of textual materials.  But I do find it fascinating that due to his extensive research and desire to help his fellow man, we are able to read and interact with his works.

Biographical information - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Culpeper

Diane Culpin