[PADG:1694] Re: Dust jackets

["Julie Page" <julie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> "Randy Silverman" <randy.silverman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 05/06/02 16:21 PM >>>
Julie,

I don't subscribe to the PADG list, but I am delighted to see this topic being discussed.  Thanks for keeping me in the loop.  Could you post this message for me please?  Many thanks, Randy
*****************
It is my opinion that research libraries should save dust jackets on all new acquisitions, and what better place to save them than on the book?  There are several excellent reasons for doing this, including:

1.  Dust jackets provide books with a unique visual identity that helps attract patrons by allowing them to differentiate between titles on the shelf.  As such, this specific graphic art expresses a publishers' aesthetic intent for the way each book was originally intended to be received by the reader, and as such, inextricably links each jacket to its book.  Over time, it is remarkable to see the way graphic art trends define the cultural aesthetic, e.g., an astute aesthetician can "date" a book by its dust jacket (cover).

2.  Dust jackets often contain a blurb (sometimes written by the author), a brief biography of the author, the author's picture, and excerpts from book reviews all of which inform and streamline a reader's decision to read or not to read the book, increasing its utility.  

3.  Books that retain their jackets tend to accrue greater value over time than jacket-less books.  And, most significant to libraries,

4.  Books reinforced with a polyester wrapper over the dust jacket circulate between six and ten times more than volumes that have had the dust jacket removed (e.g., compare the circulation records till failure of an average new books in your public library protected with a polyester dust jacket protector with those circulating n the research library) because modern publishers' bindings are weakly constructed.

As a result of these reasons, the University of Utah began retaining dust jackets for its circulating collection books (in addition to  rare collections) two years ago and has experienced only positive results.  Patrons, both faculty and students alike, have responded positively to the new look of the collection and the jackets actually seem to increase circulation.  From the Preservation Department's perspective it may still be too early to tell, but only a couple of these new acquisitions with jackets have needed rebinding during the past two years, and when the bindings do fail, we remove the dust jacket and reattach it to the new library binding.  

The cheapest way to deal with the problem is to by 2 mil. polyester pre-cut in sheets (26.5" x 13" and 32" x 16" have worked pretty well, with oversized books requiring a 3 mil. custom-cut sheet), folding it around the dust jacket to protect it on all sides, and attaching the polyester to itself (i.e., over the edges of the boards) with 3M 888 (called "Conservation & Preservation Tape, a clear polyester support coated with an acrylic, pressure-sensitive adhesive).  Four pieces of tape per board (eight per book), with special collections materials simply having a wide turn-in and no adhesive attachment.  Protecting dust jackets takes about 10 minutes per volume and you can train a volunteer staff.  We attach the call number to the outside of the polyester. 

Interestingly, you can get a similar treatment from Blackwell for those of you on a pre-approval plan.  They use a different tape and attach it directly to the binding, but for circulating collections this is a pretty good compromise when you consider the polyester jacket protector provides a far greater number of circulations for your material, and that lacking that, you'll have to rebind the book in short order, eliminating the binding altogether.  (If you are interested in exploring this, please check with Holy Schmidt, Consultative Services Specialist at Blackwell Book Services/Academic Book Center, 800-547-6426, x 1207, or holly.schmidt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx).  What's not to like?

Warmest regards,
Randy Silverman
Preservation Librarian
University of Utah Marriott Library
295 South 1500 East
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0860
801-585-6782
*******************

>>> drewes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 05/03/02 01:19PM >>>
Randy Silverman gave a wonderful presentation about the value of
historic
dust jackets at AIC, I think 2 years ago.  He found that the value of
dust
jackets was well worth the cost of keeping them.  I think  he was able
to
change the policy of discards, at least that is what I remember him
saying.
Randy,  are you out there?  please tell the whole story.  

jeanne drewes

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Stam [mailto:stam@xxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 12:22 PM
To: padg@xxxxxxx
Subject: [PADG:1678] Re: Dust jackets


This is an issue that has bothered me for a long time.  

The primary reasons I usually hear are:
1) It is too expensive to provide mylar covers.  
2) Cheaper alternatives usually involve adhesives and 
damage the jackets anyway.  They are also time consuming to 
apply.
3) Without protection dust jackets get lost and damaged.  
4) Finally, and most cited, call numbers and bar-codes are 
either obscured by the jacket or, if you put them on the 
jacket, get lost.

In responding to faculty, I have always focused on the 
differences in mission between general and special 
collections, then dscussed the complications that arise in 
trying to keep the jackets in circulating collections.

I have toyed with the idea of clipping out the bottom of 
the spine in order to reveal the call number and retain the 
jacket, (our bar-codes are on the inner back cover so they 
aren't an issue) but haven't acted on that impulse yet. I 
would love to hear if any others have any retention policy 
or ideas for dust jackets.

Julian Stam


On Fri, 03 May 2002 11:41:4 -0400 Beth Picknally Camden 
<bp2f@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I have had a question from a faculty member wanting to know why
academic 
> libraries don't keep dust jackets on books.  I can make a good
argument 
> about expense of mylar covers, etc.   However, I was wondering--what
is
the 
> history of this practice?   Is there a preservation argument for
removing 
> them?
> 
>     -Beth
>
****************************************************************************
***********
> Beth Picknally Camden                                      Voice: 
(434)
924-7791
> Director, Cataloging Services                            Fax:  (434)
982-4579
> Alderman Library                       Internet:
bpcamden@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> P.O. Box 400108
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~bp2f
> Charlottesville, VA 22904-4108
> An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. -- Mahatma Gandhi
>
****************************************************************************
***********
> 

Julian Stam        
__________________________________
Preservation Manager
Boston College, O'Neill Library
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467-3810
PHONE:617-552-1404   FAX: 552-0599
www.bc.edu\libraries.html