Over the last couple of years Tim Barrett and I have engaged in a
conversation about the role of gelatin sizing in papermaking and
printing. The central issue we have been discussing is this: sizing has a
negative impact on print quality but a beneficial impact on the
longevity and endurance of paper. Tim’s research into 15th and 16th
century European papermaking processes has suggested that some, and
perhaps many, post-15th century books were printed on waterleaf
(unsized) paper to which the books’ printers, or someone else, added
sizing prior to binding. For those of us who use very expensive handmade
paper to make even more expensive books, the thought of dipping our
printed sheets into a vat of liquid gelatin is a ripe topic for
contemplation on a dark night of the soul. Despite this, after our
initial conversation I sent Tim some printed sheets from which I had
removed the sizing so that he could re-size them. The results were
intriguing but not entirely persuasive. Although the increased
durability that sizing can lend to paper is appealing—books are meant to
last beyond a single user or century—the books that I make are used in
ways that are not comparable with those that a 16th century book had to
endure. A contemporary press book that is printed on soft, unsized
cotton paper, housed in a box, and stored inside a
temperature-controlled vault will bear its age well. If the same paper
had been used to print pocket books for traveling Humanists, the books
would not have withstood the demands of their owners.
The
repeated physical use to which many early printed books were subjected
lent them a patina similar to that of well-used tools, full of shine and
scuff. In addition to the frequency of opening or the method of storing
their books, early modern bibliophiles differentiated themselves in one
important way from their 21st century avatars: they wrote in their
books. They wrote in the margins, between the lines, in the voids of
woodcuts, on fly leaves and paste downs. They parsed, debated, excised,
and amended their texts in ways that are unthinkable to contemporary
private press printers, but that were certainly expected by the printers
of the day. If the paper in their books had not been sized, the ink of
their pens would have bled into the paper fibers rather than holding a
crisp line. The expectation of marginalia was another determining factor
in the sizing of book paper after printing. Just as it is today, use was the arbiter of process.
An example of ink bleed on paper that had its sizing washed off in a flood.
With
many of these issues in mind, Tim Barrett and his students at the
University of Iowa Center for the Book have been trying to recreate the
working conditions of a pre-Industrial papermill, employing a three
person team to make 100-200 sheets of handmade paper per hour. (A video
of this process may be viewed here.)
The paper is not meant to be perfect or precious but well-made and
serviceable, to invite contact and annotation. With this paper, Tim and
his colleagues are attempting an intriguing sleight of hand, engaging an
historical process in the hope that it will arbitrate contemporary use.
The problem, of course, is that once a craftsperson puts something out
into the world, he/she cannot control how that object is used. It's all
well and good to want people to use paper in a certain way, it's another matter altogether to get them to actually do it.
Handmade paper, however quickly made, instills a certain amount of fear
in bibliophiles. The speed with which it is made does not alter its
perceived preciousness. The missing element is content.
In
thinking about how to get people to use Tim's paper more aggressively,
it occurred to me that I would have to make a book whose content would
tilt the scales; a book that would encourage people to take the book off
the shelf and into the messy world of their daily lives. No book
satisfied this requirement better than a cookbook. In the hope of finding
people who would be willing to put a fine book through the paces, I have
invited a group of bibliophiles to submit one or two recipes each for a
small cookbook. In turn, each participant has agreed to cook as many of
the recipes in the book as they can within the space of a year, to cook
them with the book on their counter top, and to take notes in ink on
the pages of the book. At the end of the year Annie will photograph the
books for a comparative digital catalogue and I will coordinate an
exhibit of the used books. To fund the project I will print an edition
of fifty additional copies for sale at a reasonable price.
The
text will be set in a new typeface of mine (to be discussed in a future
blog post) and printed on unsized sheets of UICB paper. Once printed, I
will ship the sheets back to Iowa for sizing. Maria Fredericks, the
Drue Heinz Book Conservator at the Morgan Library & Museum, has
designed a paper binding typical of inexpensive book production in the
European handpress period. A team of binders, overseen by Maria, will
attempt a high-speed production process for the binding similar to the
one that Tim uses for the paper. The book should be completed by summer
2015.
The Particpants
Walter Bachinsky & Janis Butler
Bob Baris & Freddy Scott
Timothy Barrett & Jodie Plumert
Carolee Campbell
Dan DeSimone
David Esslemont
Susan Filter & Peter Koch
Maria Fredericks
Paul Gehl & Rob Carlson
Ian Kahn & Suzanne Hamlin
Nancy Loeber
Russell Maret & Annie Schlechter
Robert & Margaret McCamant, Jack Croucher
Sandra & Harry Reese
Liv Rockefeller & Kenneth Shure
Frank Rothkamm & Nina Schneider
Sara Sauers & Mike Lewis-Beck
Gaylord Schanilec
Richard Seibert
Jane & Cary Siegel
Mina Takahashi & Marco Breuer