[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Repair <- vs -> conserve and apology
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Repair <- vs -> conserve and apology
- From: Cor Knops <knops@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 18:51:02 +0000
- Comments: Authenticated sender is <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Message-id: <199704291654.JAA19502@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: "The Book Arts: binding, typography, collecting" <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I had some pretty angry response on my posting on "repairing" books.
Although I indeed had the intention to stir up just a little I did
not mean to offend anyone. Perhaps it is indeed a bit of a semantic
problem: in Dutch the word repair if of a somewhat lower value as the
word restore or conserve. The reason I wrote my earlier posting was
to express my dislike of the things that repairmen do with books. I
frequently get to see (and have to restore) books which have been maltreated
by people who are totally unaware of the disasters they bring to old
books. I don't want to go any further on this but we all know the
PVA-syndrome, the Sellotape-inferno and the
Chloridebleaching-catastrophe. This is what I mean when I want to
discriminate between professional restorers and handymen who think
that restoring books is just the same as repairing a washing-machine.
It's not that I think that my profession puts me in a "high & mighty"
position, or that I'm more or better than anyone else.....but there
is a difference between someone who spends his whole life, day after
day, trying to do the best possible on books, and someone who
incidentally does some repair work on them....
So, here's another appropriate apology: sorry to everybody who felt
offended and of course to Sue Dunlap in particular.
Conservation & Restoration of Books and Paper
6151 CS Munstergeleen / Netherlands
tel/fax +31 46 4200024
mail knops@xxxxxxxxx OR corknops@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx