Illustrations by Nora Ligorana Apprentice, Bindery Program Johns Hopkins University

collection management resources

Chapters in Serials Administration

The BindinE and Preparation of Periodicals:

Alternative Structures and Procedures

John Dean Johns Hopkins University

The effects of inflation on libraries are well-known. Increases in overall budget allocations are rarely sufficient to meet increased costs, thus reductions in areas not directly and immediately related to front-line service requirements are frequently made. The binding budget is a prime target for cuts, even in the face of higher binding costs. Therefore the need to rationalize binding decisions in terms of patterns of use is imperative. In most cases, it is not possible to reduce the number of items needing binding without creating an organizational crisis of loose periodical parts vulnerable to theft and loss. Thus, if the number of units cannot be reduced, then the unit cost must be. Most commercial binders have responded to this problem by devising various types of "econ- omy" bindings, which while not conforming to the Library

1 Binding Institute standard for library binding, offer the at- traction of lower unit cost. Unfortunately, most economy bindings incorporate the appearance and all the inherent faults of certified binding and utilize cheaper, and weaker binding materials. The economy binding is sold as a cheaper form of "standard" binding for "lesser used materials," e v e n

though separate specifications for this category were esta- blished in 1957. 2 These "Minimum Specifications for Lesser Used Materials for Libraries," or LUMSPECS, describe a form of binding radically different in appearance from the seeming- ly traditional full bound cloth library binding, a feature which has probably been influential in inhibiting any wide accep- tance of the style. It is curious that the "traditional" full cloth case binding is a relatively modem invention, owing more to the needs of mass production streamlining 3 than to the structural demands of the book, or indeed to the aes- thetic needs of the librarian. The LUMSPEC binding has a plain binder's board front and back, with only a square and un-rounded cloth strip for a spine. The edges of the boards are flush with the book edges, giving the overall impression

of cheapness of appearance and weakness of structure. Yet little of the more substantial full cloth case binding

has to do with durability of structure. Modern libraries have become accustomed to associating the conventional appear- ance of a full cloth case binding with acceptable st'andards of durability, without sufficiently analyzing their basic needs or questioning some of their assumptions. Thus, for example, many law librarians insist that their cloth case bindings have highly expensive, but functionally useless, gold lines across the spines to fulfill their expectations of what law books should look like. The lines, in fact, imitate the false cords (ridges) on the hollow spines of law calf or sheep bindings of the late nineteenth century, which were in themselves struc- turally useless caricatures of the structural features of earlier bindings. In order to go beyond visual assumptions and ex- amine some alternative binding methods, it is necessary to briefly review some of the historical factors affecting the development of the modern library binding.

Until late into the nineteenth century, books were n o t

bound specifically for multi-use libraries. Books consisted of printed sheets folded into gatherings or sections° which were sewn through the fold and bound by trade bookbinders in bindings specifically designed for the individual purchaser. In 1850 the first public libraries were established in England, followed a few years later by establishment in America. The clamor for adult education made them enormously popular, and the wear on books and sudden growth in the periodical literature created a demand for large scale bookbinding meth- ods. Eventually, standards were established in 1905 by the [Royal] Society of Arts, 4 serving as guidelines for library binding structure in British libraries for many years. Briefly, these standards required that: all signatures be sewn through the fold with unbleached linen thread on to no fewer than three unbleached linen tapes; the spine be lightly rounded and

SERIALS REVIEW JULY/SEPTEMBER 1980 87

backed; the boards be of seasoned millboard, split down the inside back edge to accommodate the ends of the sewing tapes (see Figure I); the spine have a stout paper tube fas- tened to it; the entire book covered with cloth or buckram. The structure of this style is extremely sound, as the small board overlap projecting beyond the book edges (the square) is maintained by the binding's rigidity when standing on the shelf. The basic, and most significant, difference between this cloth binding and the modern cloth case, is that with the for- mer, the binding is built onto the book and is thus integrated with i t ; while with the latter, case and book are processed quite separately to produce more productive work flow, and to enable machine title stamping. The difference in appear- ance, at least initially, is slight, but the difference in effect is striking, particularly for heavy books. An English library bind- ing company, Ben Riley of Huddersfield, provides a useful distinction:

Long experience has convinced us that for all cloth or buckram covered library books the "spli t" board is preferable. Otherwise there is always the possibility that with an open back [case binding] the cover may come away from the book unless the tapes and end sheets are inserted into split boards. 5

Unfortunately, modern labor costs have effectively re- moved the genuine library cloth binding from practical consid- eration, while the inherent weakness of the modem cloth case, i.e., potential separation from the book block, remains.

The traditional ideal of sewing through the signature fold must not only be sacrificed because of its higher labor inten- sity, but because few modem periodical publishers issue parts in folded signatures. Over the last several years periodical pub- lishing trends have been towards narrower margins and parts made up of collations of single leaves, side-stapled or glued to- gether. In realistic terms, the binder must select from only three basic methods for fastening leaves together: 1) over- sewing; 2) cleat sewing; 3) adhesive binding.

Oversewing Oversewing has been the favored method for primary

structure in America over the last sixty years. This has been undoubtedly largely due to the development of the oversewing machine by Elmo Reavis and others between 1920 and 1925, ° and its almost wholesale adoption by the library binding in- dustry which is always eager to reduce labor cost. The method of overSewing was not new, a method combining a perforating machine and hand sewing having been patented in England by Cedric Chivers in 1904, 7 but the Reavis machinespeeded up the process so successfully that it began to be used almost indiscriminately by the industry. In simple terms, the process involves grinding off a portion of the inner margin, piercing of the back edges of the pages with needles, and interlocking the threads at the spine. While the method is extremely strong and ideal for materials likely to receive very heavy use, it is generally inappropriate for materials of a permanent nature. As the paper becomes less flexible over time, the perforating effects of the needle holes cause the leaves to break and fall out. The chief complaint about the method is its reduction of the inner margin, which in combination with its general inflexibility, renders filming and rebinding difficult, if not im- possible.

Cleat sewing Cleat sewing was developed as an a t tempt to address

some of the faults of the oversewing process, its initial design being supported by the Council on Library Resources. The Smythe Manufacturing Company took over manufacturing rights in 1968, and by 1972 began producing machines. Brief- ly, the process involves the cutting of angled slits into the back edge of the book, into which thread is laced in a figure eight

88 SERIALS REVIEW JULY/SEPTEMBER 1980

pattern. 8 Although it was designed to consume less inner margin and open more freely than oversewing, the process does not seem a significant enough improvement to encourage its wholesale adoption.

Adhesive binding Adhesive binding of single leaves is a practice which has

been employed for many years by publishers and library bind- ers alike. The results have been inconsistent due to the many different types of adhesives used as well as the variety of paper weights and rates of absorbency. In addition to these variables, there are two basic methods of adhesive application, one which applies adhesive to the back edge of the paper, and another which applies adhesive to the fanned-out area of the back margin. Of the two, the latter method is to be preferred, because it hinges each leaf together with the next leaf rather than merely attaching it to a film of adhesive. While binders have used a manual form of fan binding for many years, a German "double fan" adhesive binding machine has made the process economical. The machine, which became known as the Lumbeck machine in Europe, is manufactured by the

I , !

\

Figure 1.

Ehlermann Coml~any and is gaining popular i ty among bind- ers in America. ~ Utilizing a polyvinyl resin adhesive the machine automat ica l ly double fans the back edge margin to produce a bond be tween each leaf.

It seems apparent that, when considering a choice f rom any number o f options, the deciding factors must be con- structed f rom data concerning long-term relevance to the user, and to pat terns o f use, This is especially true when de- cisions are to be made on forms of binding. The most relevant data for periodical bindings must be derived f rom the study of pat terns o f use after binding. In the fall o f 1975, the collec- t ions main tenance office o f the Milton S. Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University, conducted four such studies. The object o f the studies was to determine levels o f use after bind- ing, and whether or not the form of binding in use at that t ime was appropriate to those levels. The studies consisted of four separate surveys, each o f 100 randomly selected titles for the year 1970, using three basic criteria: 1) the number of t imes circulated; 2) evidence o f use; 3) evidence o f binding wear. Twen ty titles o f known extended high use, mainly abstracts and indexes, were no t included in the study. Of the 400 titles surveyed, more than 87 per cent (352 titles), had not been used since binding. With the except ion o f four titles with an average min imum use of twenty, the rest averaged four uses after binding_ Bindings on all the books surveyed were to the L.B.I. class A standard, which, as discussed earlier, is designed to withstand heavy use but which does no t stand up well on the shelf due to separation of book and case f rom sagging, whether used or not. The cost o f this binding was also thought to be higher than the Library could afford.

As a result o f the s tudy a new form of binding was de- signed to provide the fol lowing characteristics: 1) the binding must stand on the shelf wi thou t sagging, and be capable o f being shelved on the fore-edge wi thou t causing structural damage; 2) it must be flexible in opening to permit comfor- table reading and reprography; 3) it must be capable' o f being rebound i f necessary; 4) it must be cost effective, i f possible at least 50 per cent cheaper than class A. Accordingly, a square, flush-edged shape was decided upon as being most efficient for long-term stability. Oversewing and cleat sewing were rejected as t oo inflexible to satisfy the requi rement for full ease o f opening, and too margin-consuming to enable re- binding. The Ehlermann adhesive binding me thod was chosen, as test results indicated s tructure durabil i ty comparable to sewing, and greatly superior to o ther adhesive methods. 1° Combined with the f lush , non-sagging structure, the Ehler- mann adhesive binding is no t subjected to strain when stand- ing on the shelf, and in opening, the spine is supported by the direct adhesion o f lining and cover materials. The materials, binder 's board and library buckram, are o f the same quali ty as specified by L.B.I. for the class A standard. Precise specifi- cations were drawn up (reproduced below), and in early 1976, the bulk o f periodical titles began to be bound accordingly by a local commercia l binder. More than 35,000 "quar te r buck- r a m " periodical bindings have been produced to the specifica- t ion since 1976, wi thout a single instance o f structure failure, but wi th a 60 per cent saving in costs. The binding has proved wholly sat isfactory in achieving the purpose for which it was designed, and the structure has remained sound and in stable shape even on volumes receiving extensive use.

Specifications for Quarter-Buckram Periodical Binding

The following specifications must be considered basic to the style, and must be adhered to consistently. The Library assumes responsibility for collation, and will remove covers only when desired. Bindery will receive parts in final binding order. Binder will provide multiple-copy instruction slips or equivalent, and will guarantee uniformity of size,

buckram color, type position and size, and general configurataon. Color of buckram will be specified, and will be limited to five shades: brown, black, dark blue, maroon, and mid-green. Materials and method of con- struction as below.

Double fan, Ehlermann adhesive binding, using adhesive formu- lated for the machine.

Endsheets to be single-fold white, to have a pH not less than 6_0.

Spine to be lined before covering with hinge cloth, wrapping onto the endsheets not less than three centimeters.

Inside margins and edges to be trimmed as little as possible.

Davey Red Label Boards not less than .074 an. in thickness to be glued with a polyvinyl acetate directly onto the endsheets and pressed, distance from back edge not to exceed 1.0 centimeter or to be closer than 0.5 centimeter.

Good quality Buckram of approved standard (L.B.I.) to be used for spine, glued directly on top of the set hinge cloth, wrapped onto the boards no more than 5 centimeters and no less than 2 centimeters.

Boards should not be marked during the trimming process, and the spine coverings should not be loosened or left ragged. Edge scouring caused by nicked and worn guillotine knife is acceptable providing that board edges are cleanly cut.

Printing must not be "bled" by careless trimming. Library will separate volumes not suitable for trimming, and will note foredge folds etc.

The size of each consignment will be arranged in advance. The de- livery and pick-up schedule must be consistent, occurring on the same day of the week, with a set period not to exceed twenty-eight days between for normal processing. Rush processing must be available, and the Library agrees t0 meet extra costs incurred_

Quarter Buckram Periodical Binding: Processes

This is a list of procedures for the binding of periodicals in quarter buckram flush, with plain boards. All the procedures are necessary in order that a sound and neat binding be produced. Data on the testing of the Ehlerman adhesive binding is available from selling agents the Library Binding Institute, and the United States Testing Company Inc_

1. Staples and wire stitching are removed from each issue, and the final order of parts, title page, contents, index, etc. checked.

2. The back (binding) edge is trimmed or milled off, making sure that the smallest amount possible is removed.

3. The pages and single folio endsheets are double fan adhesive bound on the Ehlerman "Double Fan" Binder, using the specially for- mulated adhesive_ A spine lining of hinge cloth (preferably Gane Bros. "Special G") running the length of the spine and wrapped onto the end- sheets approximately 3 centimeters, is applied while the book is in the machine (see figure 1).

4. Plain boards (Davey Red Label) of appropriate thickness but no thinner than .074 in. are glued directly onto the endsheets, flush with the head and approximately 0.5 centimeters from the back edge (see figure 2).

5. Buckram, pre~lettered with the volume number, title, and date is glued directly onto the spine (on top of the hinge cloth), and wrapped onto the boards approximately 5 centimeters, making sure that the joints

SERIALS REVIEW JULY/SEPTEMBER 1980 89

are firmly set.

6. The fore-edge, tail and head are trimmed flush on the guillotine. It is important at this final stage to make sure that the cloth spine and other linings have not been loosened by the trimming.

Figure 1. Figure 2. Completed binding

As may be noted from the specifications, the Library has deliberately assumed responsibility for collation and other kinds of pre-binding checking. A study of preparation and documentat ion systems carried out during the binding design phase showed that in-library collation occurred even when the binder was including the service in his standards. It was felt that the proper place for collation was in the Library where missing fronts, indexes, title pages, contents, etc. could be supplied before the volume left the building. The study iden- tified the need for: streamlining filing systems; reducing prep- aration costs; 11 better coordination between periodical de- partments and the preparation unit to reduce pick-up time lag; continuous reader access to in-binding records; and re- duction in binder 's "extra" charges for excessive lettering, etc. A department, the Commercial Binding Office, was established and steps taken to provide administrative strength in planning and scheduling procedures. A new binding instruction system was designed in cooperation with the binder, which not only greatly reduced clerical tasks, but also provided more accurate documentation, status and location information to the circu- lation department. The creation of this system enabled also a consistent reduction in title lengths, which produced signifi- cant cost savings and brought binders' titles in line with norm- al form of citation rather than corporate author main entry.

In order to eliminate the need for the commercial binding of single volume serials such as yearbooks, annual reports, etc., an effective, low-cost in-house binding process was de- veloped. This process, perfected in the University Bindery, was simplified to the point where it could be transferred to the Library cataloguing department, where it is used for all new paperback materials, both serial and monographic. Com- plete "turn-around" time averages twenty-four hours, and treatment has become a simple extension of normal pre-shelf processing. Since the implementation of this in-house binding procedure (termed "stiffening"), libraries in three other universities have established similar stiffening operations with assistance from the Milton S. Eisenhower Library staff.

By devoting time and effort to a basic analysis of ob- jectives, as well as developing effective means of producing essential data, librarians can provide themselves with a sound basis for binding specification and contract negotiation with commercial binders. 12 A general rationalization of binding specifications to equate them with patterns of use must not

be perceived as "cheapening" binding standards. In many cases, significant cost savings can go hand in hand with more appropriate, and effective, styles of binding.

i.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Notes and References

For a detailed description of these standards, see Maurice F. Tauber, ed., Library Binding Manual. Boston: Library Binding Institute, 1972, pp. 67-79. A useful discussion of them is included in Matt J. Roberts, "The Library Binder," Library Trends 24 (April 1976): 749-62.

"Minimum Specifications for Binding Lesser Used Ma- terials," American Library Association Bulletin. 52 (June 1958): 51-53.

Bernard C. Middleton. A History of English Craft Book- binding Technique. New York: Hafner, 1963, pp. 74-75.

Society of Arts. London. Report of the Committee on Leather for Bookbinding. London: Printed for the Society by Bell and Sons, 1905.

B. Riley and Company Ltd. A Modern Library Bindery. Huddersfield: Riley, 1949, pp. 8-9.

T a u b e r . . . p. 10.

Middleton . . . pp. 25--26.

American Library Association. Library Technology Re- ports. May 1972, A1--A5.

Jack Bendor. Personal communication of product litera- ture. May 16, 1974.

Ib id. Conducted by United States Testing Company, 1972.

Xerox University Microfilms. Customer Profile Analysis Report for Stanford University: Documentation. Ann Arbor: 1973. This study of preparation costs concluded that the average unit cost in large libraries for preparation only was $2.75 [p. 31].

Roberts, cited earlier, provides invaluable hints on the processes of contract drafting, negotiation, and sample evaluation.

l~ ' l ~ I~ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •

90 SERIALS REVIEW JULY/SEPTEMBER 1980