RE: [GBW] Re: washing family documents

["Frank Mowery" <FMowery@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I hope my "moralizing"  was not taken in the wrong vein.

My comments were intended for individuals who have not been given
training as to safe practices in conservation.
Please do not put me into the category of those who say "Box and leave
for posterity"  heavens forbid!  Anyone who knows me, knows I hate
boxing books (out of sight out of mind)  is why we developed transparent
spine phase boxes and clamshell boxes with transparent spines.

Books must be made usable,  Pretty to a certain extent,  some warrant
"full treatment" involving foxing remediation,  but in fact most books
are perfectly ok with the visible evidence of foxing as long as the root
causes of the foxing have been treated (acidity, too high of humidity,
mold....)

As to Bleaching I do that for clients works of art on paper practically
every day..    So I am not against it, it just has to be done with
knowledge and practice.

That's all

frank

J. Franklin Mowery
Head of Conservation
Folger Shakespeare Library
201 East Capitol St. SE
Washington DC. 20003
202-675-0332



-----Original Message-----
From: gbw-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:gbw-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steven Hales
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:41 PM
To: africa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; The email list for Guild of Book Workers
member communications
Subject: Re: [GBW] Re: washing family documents


> Tastes change and our knowledge advances, and both have led to the
> decrease in the washing and bleaching of older materials.

I think that Dorothy is spot on here. It seems to me that attitudes  
towards washing, cleaning, and binding are often a matter of fashion  
more than anything else. I'm not denying that there are/have been  
damaging practices, but all binding and conservation work is a matter  
of risk assessment. There's a scale from "put it in an acid-free box  
and never touch it in any way" to "wash it, mend it, resew it,  
rebind, do it all."  But it strikes me as excessive moralism to  
stridently denounce anyone whose assessment of which risks are worth  
taking differ from one's own.

>  As to bleaching, it is hard to justify purely for the sake of
> appearances.

Likewise, it is hard to justify rebinding a book, when we could just  
put it in a box in a dark, climate-controlled chamber for eternity.  
Books, prints, and maps have an aesthetic value too. Which is to say:  
appearances do matter. Untouched preservation for posterity is not  
the only thing that counts.

Steve

****************************************************
GBW: The email list for GBW member communications

GBW Standards - October 18-20, 2007
Dallas, TX - More info at
http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byorg/gbw/standards.shtml

The GBW website is supported and maintained by
Conservation OnLine http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byorg/gbw

To post messages, email to GBW@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For problems, contact Eric Alstrom, List Manager:
gbwlist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For info about the list, visit
http://mailman.lib.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gbw
****************************************************


****************************************************
GBW: The email list for GBW member communications

GBW Standards - October 18-20, 2007
Dallas, TX - More info at http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byorg/gbw/standards.shtml

The GBW website is supported and maintained by
Conservation OnLine http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byorg/gbw

To post messages, email to GBW@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For problems, contact Eric Alstrom, List Manager:
gbwlist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For info about the list, visit http://mailman.lib.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gbw
****************************************************