Play It Again Publication from the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin

Posted on by

Jacqueline Reid-Walsh

Both Bill Minter and I had the opportunity to be involved with Christian Bachman’s exhibition catalogue called Play it again Vom Spielbilderbuch zum Videospiel. It accompanies an interactive exhibition, “Play it again“, that he curated at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin about digital media, especially video games, including hybrid constructions. Dr. Bachman is interested in connections back to movable books so my chapter concerns Nintendo Labo and some of Lothar Meggendorfer’s constructions. Working on the piece gave me the opportunity to think backwards and forwards between paper and digital media. Working on my contribution to the volume, I remembered how Bill Minter had made an interactive, large scale facsimile a number of years ago of “Greedy Julia” from The living Strewelpeter. The book is housed in special collections and the large-scale illustration formed an important part of a display Sandra Stelts curated and I participated in. When Christian approached Bill, he kindly arranged with Special collections for it to be shared with the Library of Berlin. In return Christian sent an image of Greedy Julia in the show.

Greedy Julia on display at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin.

The companion volume to the exhibition is available open access as a downloadable pdf:

Christian A. Bachmann (Hg.) (2023): Play it again: Vom Spielbilderbuch zum Videospiel. Berlin: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz.

The contributions are in German, with two chapters (including mine) in English.

Rag Books: Dean and Son

Posted on by

Jacqueline Reid-Walsh

My interest in interactive books, especially of those for babies or very small children is of quite recent standing as I have begun to explore more of the publications by Dean and Son. The company started producing rag books at the turn of the 20th century with the stated aim of creating safe and durable books for very young children. Although the rag books were not reprints, they are a good instance of the same educational genres as the paper books, here a picture-book primer (Cope and Cope, 11, 13).  As with all primers, the aim is to educate caregivers and babies about their immediate surroundings and to do in a safe non-threatening way (Nodelman and Reimer, 130). What sets the Dean rag books apart from a paper primer is that the safe environment is not restricted to the images or  words but also in their materiality. The soft, pliable material exudes its own atmosphere– a cozy domesticity apart from any content (see Reid-Walsh and Rouse, in press).

Previously I have approached Dean and son’s output as being one of the founding families of movable book design in England in 1856, the other main family being Darton and son (McGrath, 16). Because of their association with 19th chapbooks for children, part of the “cheap print” phenomenon, their implied audience includes a broad economic range of readers. I now realize that their innovations in design include innovations in materials, and that their rivalry with Darton extends to both aspects.

With rag books I have worked mainly with images and one pristine copy of What is this? What is That? (circa 1905) held in special collections at The Pennsylvania State University Library. In May I had the opportunity visit the Baldwin library at the university of Florida and examine more rag books largely by Dean. I also became acquainted with others published by their main rivals the Darton family and the McLoughlin Brothers in the US.

In some cases, the choice of substrate for publishing seems to be arbitrary — for instance story books that were published on both paper and rag or those that combined a paper surface with a fabric backing. Here I wondered who the implied readers were : the texts such as fairy tales are directed towards a more generic child audience while the rag ones towards babies and toddlers.

One of the notable features of the Baldwin collection is how the founding curator bought books both in pristine and used conditions. With the rag books this included books that had been washed so can be compared to the pristine versions. Here I show images of a few little-used and well-used rag books, including one I have seen in different editions at both Penn state and the Baldwin. Throughout I discuss the Dean rag book claim in their logo of “quite indestructible” in terms of the implications of the qualifier. On the one hand, it could be understood as (British) understatement, or/and descriptive evaluation (Reid-Walsh and Rouse, in press). The descriptor may also allude to earlier handmade paper-making strategies up through the 18th century when paper was composed of rags and thereby more durable in comparison to machine-made pulp paper.

In terms of the claim of indestructability and others such as safety and hygiene, first I show images of the same books in different states. Then I engage in a brief comparison of two editions of What is this? What is that? (circa 1905 and 1925?).

The same book in two states: When I grow up (Baldwin library circa 1910)

Comparison of two states of the Dean's Rag Book "When I Grow Up"

This book evokes an affluent pre-world war one world with fashionably dressed woman and children, formal chauffeur and glamourous car. The handwritten style text next to the young boy provides a subtitle as well as his wish “I’ll be a Motor driver.” The rag material is firm and the pinking clean. With the washed book the material has softened, and colors have faded and changed — the green turning-blue gray, the blue washing out almost completely, the print text has disappeared, but the red is still quite vivid. The sewing and pinking are starting to fray. With some of the other more used books, the pinking has completely worn away. This shows that “quite” “indestructible” is perhaps a fair assessment.

Two versions of What is this? What is that? (Penn State 1906, Baldwin 1925?)

These two editions effectively evoke different period representations of early childhood in terms of their household and play objects. In both cases, the only images of humans appear on the front covers.

Cover of the Dean's Rag Book "What is this? What is that?"

The 1906 edition creates a bucolic image of lower middle and middle class early childhood. It includes depictions of a number of multiuse and household objects. Notably the cover depicts a small wheel barrow being used by a toddler (presumably a girl?) in full Victorian nursery attire. In the barrow are non-gender specific toys such as a lamb on a pull board, and ball. This continues within the book.

Image of the cover of another state of the Dean's Rag Book "What is this? What is that?"

In comparison, the 1925 edition book updates the child representation and objects to evoke a “modern” and more affluent household. The images include more toys and emphasizes gender specificity in clothing and objects. The front cover does this strikingly — the girl with fashionably bobbed hair and boy are well dressed. They have an elaborate doll house and several toys like dolls and a stuffed bear. Notable is the racist golliwog.

Interior spread of "What is this? What is that?" rag book that includes an image of a rag book.

It is interesting to note that one page includes a self-referential image of “rag book” which closely recalls and perhaps reworks images from the earlier edition. The image is set amongst household items and sweet treats. The image of the alarm clock on the page, as with the image of the motor car on the front cover or the other rag book, indicates an easy way to date a book (apart from fashion)!

References:

Cope, P. and D. (2009) Dean’s Rag Books & Rag Dolls. New Cavendish Books.
McGrath, L. (2002) This Magical Book. Movable Books for Children, 1771–2001. Coach House.
Nodelman, P and Reimer, M. (2002) The Pleasures of Children’s Literature. Pearson.
Reid-Walsh, J. and Rouse, D. (in press) “Understanding the Design Values of Baby Books: Materiality, Co-Presence and Remediation,” Children’s Literature in Education: An International Quarterly.

Viewing What is this? What is that (1905) and The Beginning, Progress and End of Man (circa 1650) under the microscope: What do I see?

Posted on by

Jacqueline Reid-Walsh

A short time ago I had the privilege of working with Dr. Sarah K. Rich, Director of the Center for Virtual/Material Studies, and Dr. Clara Drummond to examine the materials of two books from two different periods, one composed totally of fabric and the other of early modern paper. I have been struggling to answer questions about the materiality and the interactive affordances of the two books by using a light box and magnifying glass, which was only partly satisfactory. Dr. Rich used a powerful microscope that allowed us to see the threads distinctly. Her analysis of the threads explained questions about the interactivity of the materials in the books published some 150 years apart.

The much more recent book is intended for babies and toddlers. Called What is this? What is that (1905), it is the second book in the series of Dean’s rag books published until the second world war. The books are described as being composed completely of rag for durability, safety and cleanliness for baby and caretaker (Cope and Cope, 13) and the logo on the book claims that the books were “quite indestructible.” The artifact is smooth to the touch, soft and very pliable, reminiscent of a cambric shirt and I was curious about what type of cotton was used.

Close up of Dean's rag book

While the weave of the material is suggested to the naked eye, under the microscope we could see how the material is composed of loose weave cotton thread.  We could even see the pattern of the threads which are in a plain weave, crossing over and under, with the longitudinal warp and the traverse weft clearly visible. What was also apparent was that the threads are of different widths and that the space between the threads is about the same as the width of the threads themselves.

Dean's rag book through the microscope

Another question I had was how were the colors were applied to the fabric? Was there any pigment or were they printed directly on the material? How was this achieved? According to Dr. Rich the method of color printing was coal tar dye. There are eight colors used, most are distinct, but as seen in the microscope enabled photograph, the orange is created from layering yellow with red. This demonstrates how the material was run through the rollers multiple times (Cope and Cope, 14). The green color is vivid but unlike the paint of the period there is no arsenic. Indeed, the colors are safe as the company claimed. Dr. Rich said that the smooth surface, so attractive even after all these years, is created by starch or by ironing.

The Beginning, Progress and End of Man (circa 1650)

By comparison, the much older object a religious turn-up book called The Beginning, Progress and End of Man circa 1650 and it is composed of paper. However, paper of the 17th century is not made of machine wood pulp as is modern paper but of linen rag. The difference between early modern paper and modern paper is obvious even to the touch of an interactor such as myself when working first with a facsimile and then the original. The facsimile feels smooth while the original feels soft but with an almost invisible texture that provides some substance. According to Bill Minter, the senior conservator at the university, this softness is due to the material itself which has not been treated.

Beginning, Progress, and End of Man turn-up book under the microscope.

Looking at the object through the microscope it is apparent to the educated eye that the linen was made of flax. Under the high magnification the fibres look like miniature bamboo with horizontal notches. The color is yellowish.

Looking at the edge of paper from the Beginning, Progress, and End of Man through the microscope.

Comparing the cotton rag book to the paper book made of flax, I wonder what is distinctive about these materials. The cotton rag book is very supple so the pages can be folded or rolled without harm. The flax paper book has more substance but is not stiff like modern paper so the flaps can be easily lifted up and down and stay in position when placed.  Looking up flax in both a general and an academic source I learn that in Western countries textiles made from flax are called linen and that while linen fibres are stronger than cotton they are also less elastic.

There is quite an extensive article on Wikipedia on flax with some cited sources at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax#History. According to this article, flax fibers taken from the stem of the plant are two to three times as strong as cotton fibers. Additionally, flax fibers are naturally smooth and straight. Europe and North America both depended on flax for plant-based cloth until the 19th century, when cotton overtook flax as the most common plant for making rag-based paper. The article goes to explain that flax fiber is extracted from the bast beneath the surface of the stem of the flax plant. Flax fiber is soft, lustrous, and flexible; bundles of fiber have the appearance of blonde hair, hence the description “flaxen” hair. It is stronger than cotton fiber, but less elastic.

This information is supported by an academic article by Helmut Becker called “Growing and Hand Processing Fibre Flax and Hemp for Hand Papermaking” (2008). Becker draws on the work of Tim Barrett who has extensively researched both oriental bast fibres and western bast fibres like flax and hemp. They are fascinated by the quality and permanence of early handmade papers and try to make contemporary paper that has the same qualities. In terms of interactive properties of the material, Becker refers to the work of Douglas Howell who created successful, creative three-dimensional paper artwork stemming from his experiments in pulping raw fiber flax (Becker, 3).

comparison of two books under the microscope

Comparing the photos of the cotton and flax fibres under the microscope helps explain my questions about the materiality and the affordances of the interactivity of the materials in the books published some 150 years apart. I am struck in both cases how the books were not intended for an elite market but for middle and lower class audiences — babies in the case of the Dean rag book — and in the case of the turn-up book part of the “cheap’ or popular print culture of 17th century England consumed by a wide audience of people old and young. That these books have survived in very good condition through the intervening years is largely due to their material as well as their careful preservation in special collections. They provide a glimpse into how the playful literacies of earlier centuries were able to be achieved, and provides a topic that needs further examination.

References

Becker, Helmut,  “Growing and Hand Processing Fibre Flax and Hemp for Hand Papermaking.” Presentation at the International Conference on Flax and Other Bast Plants, Saskatoon, Canada, July 21-23, 2008. https://www.academia.edu/19693013/Growing_and_Processing_Fibre_Flax_and_Hemp_for_Hand_Papermaking

Cope, Peter and Dawn Cope. Dean’s Rag Books and Rag Dolls. London: New Cavendish Books, 2009.

“Flax,” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax

Material matters: Back to The Beginning, Progress and End of Man

Posted on by

Jacqueline Reid-Walsh

This blog returns to the 17th century turn-up book, The Beginning, Progress and End Of Man held in Penn State Library Special Collections. I have long been fascinated by it for several reasons: its design as an interactive object, its broad range of implied reader-viewer-player including adult and child, semiliterate and literate, and its status as cheap print like the ballads, broadsides and chapbooks discussed by Tessa Watt (1991). I have focused on the design affordances and the visual-textual interactive engagements they invite. What fascinates me is the playful possibilities of the bi-modal text since an interactor may lift the flaps up and down according to the directions or against the “grain” of the conventional words. An interactor may also play with the accordion folds and arrange the panels differently.

What I never really considered was the paper and its qualities. My first engagements were in restricted conditions such as being attached to a large volume (1650,1688/9). Many times I work with paper facsimiles or digital copies. I have been able to learn about the interactivity-which is marvelous. But I never really thought about the substrate and how this impacts the interactivity.  After COVID closures finished and we are working with the items again, I am re-encountering the turn-up anew.

I have been reading up a bit on papermaking (Hunter, 1947), and fortunate to have engaged in a paper making session with Bill Minter. I also listen to lectures by experts, most recently by Professor Timothy Barrett of the Center for the Book at the University of  Iowa. In his fascinating lecture, he talked about the qualities of 15th century paper and also about paper that was not considered “good” quality. During the chat session after his lecture, he discussed the importance of all hand-made paper and how non-quality paper expanded the readership of different classes and ages. Emboldened by Dr. Barrett’s lecture, I had a question about 17th century cheap paper and was fortunate to have a zoom session with him. I asked about 17th century paper and I wondered if the affordances of the substrate provide fluidity to the strip and turnable flaps. I also explained I was intrigued by the color (which appears light tan) and what that might signify. Is this due to its age? Was this paper more durable? Was it whitened somehow when published? Or was it always not white?

I also consulted Philip Gaskell’s A New Introduction to Bibliography, 2nd edition (1972), where he talks about English hand-made paper. He writes that there was little English-made white paper in the mid-17th century so it was imported from abroad. Up to 1670, the paper English mills produced was brown and connected to the fact that English people wore mainly wool so there was a lack of linen rags (Gaskell, 60).

On the EBBA project site, there is an article called “Other Common Papers: Papermaking and Ballad Sheet Sizes” by Gerald Egan and Eric Nebeker (2007). They refer to Alfred Shorter who describes how “coarser rags, netting, cordage, canvas, bagging, and other materials of flax and hemp [were used] in the manufacture of brown and other common papers” (1971, 14; emphasis added). Egan and Nebeker continue, “Brown papers were used, as today, for wrapping objects and for other non-print purposes.” At the end they speculate about what paper was used for the cheapest of print products, broadsides: “To meet the needs of the lowest end of the print market, the broadside ballad market, papermakers probably used some combination of linen and the ‘coarser rags, netting, cordage, canvas, bagging, and other materials of flax and hemp’ that Shorter describes, in order to produce the cheapest “white” paper that was suitable for print.”

I have looked at Beginning, Progress and End of Man using a light and magnifier and noticed chain lines wires lines. It would be fascinating to examine the turn-up more closely to see if we can determine the paper’s original colour, make-up, and composition.

Picture of the center of Beginning, Progress, and End of Man turn-up book as seen through a magnifying glass.

References

  1. Egan, Gerald and Eric Nebeker (2007). “Other Common Papers: Papermaking and Ballad Sheet Sizes.” https://ebba.english.ucsb.edu/page/papermaking
  2. Gaskell, Philip. A New Introduction to Bibliography 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1972.
  3. Hunter, Dard. Papermaking: The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft. New York: Dover, 1978.
  4. Shorter, Alfred Henry. Paper Making in the British Isles: An Historical and Geographical Study. Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1971.
  5. Watt, Tessa. Cheap Print and Popular Piety, 1550-1640. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1991.