Cheers and Good Luck Tanya!

A couple of months ago I blogged about my boss, David Gregory, retiring and now I get to reminisce about our former Head of Special Collections and University Archivist, Tanya Zanish-Belcher.  Just two weeks after David left, Tanya went off to be the Director of Special Collections and University Archivist at Wake Forest University.  Although, those of us still here at ISU really resented the fact that she was sending us images of daffodils blooming in Winston-Salem in March (especially since it was snowing in Ames at the time and is now snowing here in May!), we miss her.

Tanya started here in 1995 as the Curator of the Archives of Women in Science and Engineering, and in 1998 became the Head of Special Collections.  Laura, our archivist, blogged a farewell to Tanya in January highlighting what she has done for and meant to the Department over her 17 year tenure.  She was their leader and mentor, spokesperson across campus and the community, and a national presence in the profession.  She’s a Society of American Archivists Fellow.  It doesn’t get much better than that.  She’s a dynamo, participating actively at every level in the archives world, but she also looks beyond the Archives and Special Collections.

When I started here, the relationship between Special Collections and Preservation was a little chilly.  Communication was non-existent and, pre-Tanya, items for conservation were selected without Special Collection’s knowledge.  Tanya made it a point to repair the relationship and she not only became my colleague and co-worker but also my faculty mentor, collaborator, friend, and some would say co-conspirator.  She brought to my attention some of the problems that she had discovered and we talked about workflows, tensions over decision making, and the lack of communication.  We saw this as a shared challenge and worked at establishing workflows and opening lines of communication.  We both knew all too well the stories about obstinate curators and conservators that would only consider the singular best way to provide access to, value, handle, and treat an artifact; any compromise would go against their standards even if it meant it could no longer be stored on any shelf or used in anyway.

This is not to say that Tanya and I always saw things eye-to-eye, and on some issues probably still don’t.  We also brought our differing philosophies and perspectives to the table when discussing preservation and access.  Special Collections and Preservation have closely aligned but slightly different missions and goals.  Our responsibilities to the collection and the user, and our codes of ethics guide us in ways that do not always result in the same expectations and results.  We learned to compromise without straying from our codes of ethics or standards, but this took a lot of communicating and learning about the real issues behind the disagreements.  As I mentioned, we still may not agree on everything, but I learned so much from the conversations and arguments we had.  These discussions on when full-treatment was appropriate versus stabilization or simply re-housing were very informative.   We ended up collaborating on a couple of articles that evolved out of our discussions:  “Pitfalls, Progress, and Partnership:  Collaboration Between Special Colelctions and Preservation in Academic Libraries,” and “Square Pegs, Round Holes:  Thinking Creatively about Housing and Storage.”

Spa day!

I think it’s funny that colleagues ask me what I’m going to do without Tanya or how I’m holding up now that she is gone because I do miss my friend but they do not seem to realize that we sometimes battled it out.  For that I am grateful because I am a better preservation advocate now that I also have a better understanding of the curator/archivist perspective.  I’m certain that our philosophical debates will continue over email and we will continue to learn from each other, but I miss our mimosas!

 

Hand in Hand: Analog and Digital Preservation

Sometimes people are surprised to find out that I have an interest in digital preservation.  I find their surprise surprising.  It’s as if they assume that, because I am a book and paper conservator, I must labor away in an ivory tower filled with moldering books while the modern trappings of technology hold no sway over me, if, indeed, I realize that “digital technology” exists at all.

Image from Lisa Gregory’s ASERL-sponsored webinar “Preservation Planning and PREMIS,” held on April 2, 2013, 11 am EST.

While it is true that my profession entails a love affair with history (i.e. “the past”), and the literal tools of my trade are mechanical devices and hand tools designed centuries ago, my passion for preserving the cultural record crosses the boundary of analog versus digital.  As time ticks relentlessly on, the culture of the present day slips ever backwards into history, and preserving born-digital works becomes just as important as preserving centuries-old manuscripts.  In truth, I see little difference in the mission.  In my day-today activities, I may deal more with the chemical deterioration processes of cellulose than I do with corrupted bitstreams, but I still consider it a significant part of my profession to stay informed about advances in all aspects of library and archives preservation.

I’m lucky to have a supervisor who shares my sentiments.  Our Head of Preservation includes me on the “Digital Team,” which is made up of our Head of Preservation, the Digital Initiatives staff, the Digital Repository Coordinator, the University Archivist and Assistant Archivist, and — when the position is filled later this spring — our Cataloging and Metadata Management Librarian.  This also means that I am invited to educational webinars like the one we all attended today, the ASERL-sponsored webinar “Preservation Planning and PREMIS,” presented by Lisa Gregory, the Digital Collections Manager at the State Library of North Carolina.  The webinar is the first in a series of four about digital preservation.  I enjoy thinking over the theories and practicalities of digital preservation while I’m at the bench, repairing and mending books and documents centuries older than I am.

 

Why Am I Surprised?

Friends who read the blog have been asking what I’ve been doing lately since I haven’t posted for awhile. The answer is that I’ve been over in Special Collections creating an inventory of the scrapbooks in the collection. My life has looked like this lately.

And this.

That’s not to say that the scrapbooks are boring. There is some pretty cool stuff in those boxes that you will be hearing about in the coming months, but I will admit that I’ve been missing my workbench lately.

No worries, though, because Melissa has my back (I think). She asked me to work on this the other day.

I was a bit surprised that she brought me a book to work on until I opened it and found tears,

tape,

and large pieces of folded paper.

Am I the only one surprised to discover she brought me a book of bound blueprints? It seems I am now the lab’s blueprint expert.

The book contained three beautiful drawings for the original library building. I’ve taken them out of the binding to repair and flatten them. Our friends over at Facilities, Planning and Management have kindly agreed to scan them for us on their blueprint scanner, and we’ll hopefully have them up on the Special Collections web page in about a month.

 

1091 Project: The Good, The Bad, The Past Repairs

This week’s 1091 Project considers previous repairs and when to remove them or let them be.  The examples I was able to find here in the ISU Library Conservation Lab were not all repairs per se; some were preservation rehousing decisions.

At some point in the long-distant past, this collection of manuscripts was hinged onto stubs, and bound into a single volume.  In some cases, as shown above in the image on the right, the manuscript sheet was hinged onto a stub and then additional paper was hinged onto the tail edge of smaller sheets to make them all the same dimensions before binding.

Many of the manuscripts’ primary supports are becoming embrittled, so I was reluctant to remove the stubs from the paper supports either mechanically or by introducing moisture.  Instead, the volume was disbound and the stubs were trimmed by hand along the edge of the primary supports.  Some of the manuscripts will be encapsulated, and all will be rehoused in folders in archival document boxes.

Click on image to enlarge.

The above images show a student newspaper from 1902 which had been lined with linen or muslin and bound as a book.  The information is completely legible, but not aesthetically pleasing, and not ideal for potential digitization.  However, the image below shows the deciding factor in the debate whether to disbind this volume and reverse the lining.

As you can see, there are many small tears and losses in the text which were somewhat clumsily positioned in place during the lining process.  While this treatment may be, quite frankly, ugly, the information has been retained intact.  The process of removing the lining could easily result in the loss of many of these tiny fragments, thus defeating the purpose of our preservation efforts.  In spite of this treatment’s shortcomings, the University Archivist and I decided to leave the treated item as-is.

And then there’s the book tape.  I hesitated to include these volumes with book tape on their fraying spines as “previous repairs,” since no self-respecting book conservator would ever use — or condone the use of — pressure-sensitive book tape on collection materials.  However, such items are a common problem in many libraries.  When faced with General Collection volumes that have been taped along the spine, if the tape does not extend too far onto the boards, we simply cut away and discard the original spine with its book tape covering and then perform a reback on the offended volume.  If the tape coverage is too extensive, then we send the item to the commercial bindery for a new binding.

When faced with the sad circumstance of a Special Collections volume so mistreated, we either box the item to isolate the book tape (and its attendant “adhesive creep”) from adjacent items on the shelf, or we commit ourselves to removing the tape and the adhesive residue it invariably leaves behind, a time-consuming process usually involving both mechanical and chemical means.

Finally, there are many preservation housings, such as the old-school pamphlet binders pictured above, which were once widely used, but which we now know have their own inherent vice: they tend to be made from acidic paperboard and non-colorfast cloth.  We routinely discard these and replace them with more conservationally sound materials.  (Three cheers for conservation science!)

Don’t forget to visit Preservation Underground to see how the Duke University Libraries Conservation Lab handles past repairs!

 

1091 Project: From Art to Eyeballs

As any book and paper conservator working in archives knows, a more diverse range of items crowds the shelves than the expected books, documents, and photographs.  While the focus of our training may have been the treatment of books and paper, we often find ourselves responsible for the physical care of other artifacts as well.  Globes, trophies, and medals are, perhaps, not so unusual.  However, the ISU Library Special Collections and Archives also contains the wax drum of the first ABC computer, chemistry equipment, a death mask, a street sign, and a handmade marionette puppet, to name just a few of the more unusual artifacts.  The Conservation Unit of the Preservation Department cares for all of these items and more.  In some cases, a simple condition assessment and rehousing may suffice.  Sometimes, the artifact may be cleaned or treated in-house.  In other cases, we may work with contract conservators to make sure fragile or damaged items receive appropriate conservation treatment.

     

Most recently, we have been assessing artifacts from the Christian Petersen collection.  Among the Christan Petersen “Papers” can be found several plaster models of Petersen’s larger, bronze sculptures from the 1930s and 1940s, as well as a collection of his hand tools.  Right now, these items are stored in the Special Collections vault and restricted from public access.  We are currently working to photodocument the condition of the items, rehouse them in display-worthy enclosures that will allow the public to access them safely, and arrange for any conservation treatment they may need.

Plaster model for Library Girl, 1944

Buffalo

Medal

Tools belonging to Christian Petersen.

Tools belonging to Christian Petersen.

Along with these artifacts, the Christian Petersen collection includes several linear feet of sketches, photographs, letters, and other documents.  We’re excited about working with the Special Collections staff toward the goal of giving researchers the valuable gift of access to all of these materials together, in context.  To see more images of the Christian Petersen collection, visit our Christian Petersen Digital Collection.

Don’t forget to visit Preservation Underground to see what interesting artifacts Beth Doyle has faced in the Conservation Lab of Duke University Libraries!