College and Research Libraries By P E L H A M B A R R Book Conservation and University Library Administration SI L E N C E , rarely broken, seems to sur-round the subject of book conservation and the administration of binding. T h i s applies to libraries in general and to col- lege and university libraries in particular. Discussion of book conservation (under other names) is generally concerned with the techniques of maintenance and the rou- tines of preparing materials for binding. In the literature of library administration, binding receives little mention, and surveys of individual libraries are skilful in satis- fying the amenities with the briefest of nods. O n organization charts, binding supervision usually is placed in a box in some out-of-the- way corner.1 T h i s polite neglect of the subject in discussion reflects its neglect in action, and conditions in many college and university libraries reveal, sometimes painfully, the results. T h i s is not—and, because of the very nature of the problems, cannot be—a criticism of the hundreds of librarians, di- rectly active in conserving millions of books, who are doing their work effectively. W h a t is usually found to be hampering their work, chaining their activities, gagging their judgment, and often leading to crises and waste, is a fundamental problem of adminis- tration which should concern librarians and other institutional authorities. W h a t are the symptoms of book conser- vation and binding troubles, and what can be done about them? W i t h o u t going into individual case histories, it is possible to analyze the conditions which have come to 1 A systematic search by A r t h u r R . Y o u t z , N e w Y o r k Public L i b r a r y , confirms the impression of the writer. the attention of this writer in the course of ten years of dealing with the questions and confidences of hundreds of librarians and binders. T h e records show these to be the most frequent conditions which break out into troublesome "situations" requiring action: ( i ) valuable (old, rare, irreplace- able) materials deteriorating; ( 2 ) growing backlog of unbound stock which should be bound; ( 3 ) wearing out of items in heavy or continuous demand; ( 4 ) material "in bindery" when needed; and ( 5 ) poor bind- ing (short life, poor appearance, inconven- ience in using) and consequent spoilage. T h e causes and their various permuta- tions and combinations, which are revealed most often as origins and aggravators of trouble, are, at the operating or procedural level: ( 1 ) neglect of material in library, inadequate safeguards and precautions, abuse by readers, unnecessary wear and tear, too late discovery of material needing attention; ( 2 ) poor re-selection of materials for binding, including neglect of some and unnecessary attention and expense for others; ( 3 ) faulty scheduling in library or bindery, or both; ( 4 ) absence of adequate specifications or instructions, or insufficient understanding of them in bindery; ( 5 ) inadequate preparation of materials for binding; and ( 6 ) general incompetence of binder. T h e librarian who has observed any of these conditions and diligently seeks to remedy them is confronted with the ques- tion, W h a t changes, if any, are needed at the levels of supervision? O r , is the real problem a broader one of the administration 214 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES of the library? O r , beyond that, are there vital factors in the situation which touch even broader problems of university admin- istration, requiring perhaps years of patient education of university authorities? It is very difficult to answer these questions un- less the diagnostician can compare what he finds with some definite picture of what book conservation should be and what place binding should have in it. Scope of Conservation T h e scope of book conservation may be outlined by following its essential tasks from the time of receipt of a piece of ma- terial (and before) to the time of discard: ( i ) selecting material before purchase with respect to usability and useful life; ( 2 ) ex- amining condition and probable future con- dition of all material received, whether by gift or purchase, and prescribing conserva- tion treatment, if necessary, before use; ( 3 ) providing proper housing of all material, in accordance with its conservation needs as well as its accessibility; ( 4 ) assuming re- sponsibility for its condition at all times; ( 5 ) assuring its proper handling by staff and patrons; ( 6 ) organizing systematic in- spection so that need for conservation atten- tion is promptly recognized; ( 7 ) deciding on the proper treatment of all material needing attention; ( 8 ) supervising the treatment; and (9) deciding on storing or discarding. T h e administration of book conservation, therefore, tends to touch other aspects of library administration at several points— and that may be one reason for its apparent elusiveness. Binding is only one part of real book conservation, and that is why the most efficient binding supervision may not be able to cope effectively with a library's program of book conservation. Seeking to get closer to the possible ad- ministrative difficulties underlying book conservation and binding troubles, the li- brarian may find solutions, and perhaps remedies, in answers to questions like these: ( 1 ) Is the organizational position of the binding supervisor high enough and is his authority adequate? ( 2 ) Are coordination and cooperation in relations with other serv- ice departments of library effective? ( 3 ) Is coordination between central library ad- ministration and departmental libraries ade- quate? ( 4 ) Is the over-all program of book conservation well planned? ( 5 ) Are budgeting (for the library in general and for book conservation and binding) and allocation of binding funds carefully worked out? ( 6 ) Is the staff adequate in numbers or experience? ( 7 ) Is there effective ma- chinery for cooperation with faculty and students? ( 8 ) Are housing of collections and facilities for care good? ( 9 ) Have there been lapses in judgment in selecting bindery, either by the librarian or binding supervisor (for reasons of "economy"), or by university or state authorities (be- cause of ignorance, politics, or compliance with statutory requirements, especially in the case of state-supported institutions) ? ( 1 0 ) H o w well organized are working re- lationships with the bindery? University and Library Relationship All these questions relate specifically to the operation, supervision, and administra- tion of book conservation and binding functions. Obviously, the organizational re- lations of the library to the university would tend to affect conservation of collections as well as every other phase of library op- eration. Administration of binding opera- tions would necessarily be influenced by the efficiency or inefficiency of these relations between library and university and would share the high or low status of the library in the university community. Ultimately, therefore, some of the prob- J U L Y t 1946 20 7 lems of book conservation are the same as those c o n f r o n t i n g every o t h e r phase of uni- versity l i b r a r y activity. W h a t e v e r may be the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e " t a k i n g o v e r " of d e p a r t - m e n t a l libraries by the c e n t r a l library, the book conservation and b i n d i n g problems of t h e d e p a r t m e n t a l libraries w i l l need some sort of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e solution. If the uni- versity l i b r a r y suffers f r o m i n a d e q u a t e f u n d s , it is n a t u r a l t h a t conservation and b i n d i n g suffer, a t least in p r o p o r t i o n . T h e l a g caused by university libraries g r o w i n g f a s t e r t h a n their a d m i n i s t r a t i v e m a c h i n e r y is m a r k e d in the case of con- servation. H e r e may be f o u n d , too o f t e n , n o t only the " t r a d i t i o n s " of the university and its libraries, b u t some a d d i t i o n a l t r a d i - tions of " t h e w a y w e ' v e always done i t . " If t h e r e is outside d o m i n a t i o n of p u r c h a s i n g policies and procedures, t h r o u g h a state official or t h r o u g h a university p u r c h a s i n g agent, it is m o r e likely to affect b i n d i n g con- t r a c t s seriously t h a n the buying of coal or t y p e w r i t e r ribbons. T h e b i n d i n g d e p a r t - m e n t of a university l i b r a r y m a y t h u s have its o w n l a g behind the general lag. I t may be on the receiving end of all kinds of u n - sound practices, w i t h o u t h a v i n g the p o w e r t o fight f o r itself. Stepchild Psychology T h e " s t e p c h i l d " psychology of m a n y b i n d i n g d e p a r t m e n t s , in all kinds of li- braries, is probably p a r t l y responsible f o r its neglect. I t behaves the w a y it does because it is n e g l e c t e d ; it is neglected be- cause of the w a y it behaves. I t has to deal w i t h books w h e n they are least a t t r a c t i v e a n d w i t h serials w h e n they are no longer interestingly n e w , a n d it is n a t u r a l l y as- sociated w i t h m e n d i n g and discarding. T h e " l o g i c a l " place f o r it is in t h e basement or one of the not-so-respectable corners of the building. T h e w o r k of p r e p a r i n g m a t e r i a l f o r b i n d i n g or of supervising bind- ing t r a n s a c t i o n s is n o t as exciting as o r d e r i n g n e w books or c a t a l o g i n g them or h a n d i n g t h e m to f a c u l t y a n d students. I t is a chore and it calls f o r somebody w h o loves it f o r its o w n sake. I t may, however, f a l l to one w h o does n o t love it and is not in a position to r e j e c t it. T h i s , in t u r n , neces- sarily adds to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e problems. A key problem of b i n d i n g supervision is w h e r e to p u t it in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e or- g a n i z a t i o n of t h e l i b r a r y . I t may w e l l be t h a t the w i d e variety of solutions to this p r o b l e m is a significant clue to a root cause of m a n y b i n d i n g a n d book conservation difficulties. T h a t t h e r e is a general un- c e r t a i n t y a b o u t w h e r e to p u t b i n d i n g super- vision in the l i b r a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n c h a r t is revealed again and again w h e n libraries are r e o r g a n i z e d , as they have been in in- creasing n u m b e r s in recent years. If the b i n d i n g d e p a r t m e n t ( o r w h a t e v e r it is c a l l e d ) is n o t l e f t w h e r e it is, as is t h e tendency, it seems to become the sheep which w o n ' t be counted because it j u m p s a r o u n d . T h e p i c t u r e of t h e H a r v a r d l i b r a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n , presented by E d w i n E . W i l - liams, m i g h t well serve to describe the real conditions in m a n y l i b r a r i e s : " S e r i a l records are h a n d l e d by a division of the catalog d e p a r t m e n t , and t h e b i n d i n g records divi- sion, n o w u n a t t a c h e d , may be added t o the d e p a r t m e n t in the f u t u r e . " I n the organi- z a t i o n c h a r t , t h e r e is a dotted line between " b i n d i n g " and the catalog d e p a r t m e n t , i n d i c a t i n g " r e l a t i o n s h i p s not yet estab- lished." ( T h i s is the only f u n c t i o n a l de- p a r t m e n t t h u s l e f t v a g r a n t , the f e w o t h e r instances of dotted lines being f o r special collections and rooms w h i c h are common problems in m a n y l i b r a r i e s . ) 2 Solid lines instead of d o t t e d in the o r g a n i z a t i o n c h a r t s of o t h e r libraries do not, perhaps, always p i c t u r e g r e a t e r c e r t a i n t y as to the relation- 2 W i l l i a m s , E d w i n E . " T h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Organ- ization of the H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y . " College and Research Libraries 4:218-27, J u n e 1943. 216 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES ships between binding and other depart- ments. Church describes in a recent article not a university library but the Virginia State Library, and, although the report is not very detailed, the omissions are significant. T h e conditions are characteristic of those in other libraries.3 His chart B shows the place of the doorkeeper and the janitress in the organization, but not the binding supervisor. T h e proposed plan of the new building ( C ) provides space for "exchanges, binding," but the reference to binding dis- appears in the plan ( D ) of the actual building. T h e "general library division," he reports, includes the "serials section with visible file equipment for a consolidated serials record, including binding;" also "an order section to serve all divisions and conduct exchanges" and "a catalog section, all as closely related as possible." But the personnel and function chart ( E ) of the new organization shows no reference to a binding supervisor; presumably the person in charge of binding is a subordinate under the serials librarian. California and Columbia In the case of the University of California Library (Berkeley), as described by Leupp a few years back, the organization chart shows "binding" under the assistant li- brarian, together with the "catalog depart- ment," the "accessions department," and "gifts and exchanges."4 T h e recent re- organization of the Columbia University Libraries similarly provides for dividing the functions into two groups, each under an assistant director, i.e., readers' services and technical services, the latter including bind- ing.5 3 C h u r c h , Randolph W . "A L i b r a r y R e o r g a n i z e s through B u i l d i n g . " College and Research Libraries 5 : 3 1 5 - 2 1 , 334, S e p t e m b e r 1944. 4 L e u p p , H a r o l d L . " L i b r a r y S e r v i c e on the B e r k e l e y C a m p u s , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a . " College and Re- search Libraries 4:212-17, 232', J u n e 1943. Combination of Duties T h e r e are several ways of combining binding supervision with other duties. In one university library, the combination is "order and binding;" in another, binding is joined with photography; in a third, it is put with serials; in a fourth, the assistant librarian supervises binding. Some com- binations seem to be fortuitous: the indi- vidual librarian may happen to have an unusual combination of interests or qualifi- cations; binding supervision does not take full time; or binding supervision just "seems to fit in there." In regard to the binding function in departmental libraries, the report of the A.L.A. University Libraries Section meet- ing on "Departmental and Divisional Li- braries" (Chicago, Dec. 28, 1940) presents a varied picture. T h e paper of Fred Folmer, supervisor of departmental librar- ies, State University of Iowa, is summarized thus: There are well-formulated relationships with each department of the main library: order; cataloging; serials; documents; refer- ence; circulation; binding; reserves; library instruction. In observing these relationships, the custodian must maintain a delicate balance in loyalties between the department he serves and his colleagues in the main library. . . . T h e report of the meeting continues: Several of the speakers touched on the de- partmental reactions to the main library poli- cies of acquisition and binding. Has the departmental librarian a right to change binders because he has found one who will do the work at a third less, in spite of the fact that the head of the binding department knows that particular binder's work is poor? . . . Summing up, Dorothy H . Litchfield, who reported the meeting, declared: " T h e [departmental librarian's] problems of 5 W i l s o n , L o u i s R . , and T a u b e r , M a u r i c e F . The University Library. C h i c a g o , U n i v e r s i t y of C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1945, Fig- p. H 3 - J U L Y t 1946 20 7 fifteen years ago are still unsolved: per- sonnel; cataloging; binding, etc."6 Theoretical Advantages T h e r e have, of course, been cases in which the positions of the binding depart- ment head and the departmental librarian were the reverse of those in the cases cited. T h e advantages of centralization may be- come purely theoretical if the person in charge at the central library is unfamiliar with binding, if centralization involves buy- ing binding through a purchasing agent's office which follows policies not adapted to the task, if the binder selected is incom- petent, or if the specific needs of depart- mental libraries are not given attention. W h a t e v e r the details, it is evident that in a departmental system the logical place for authority to select a bindery is still undetermined. Aside f r o m the special cases of depart- mental libraries, w h a t is the logical place of binding and conservation in the organi- zation of a university or college library? T h i s question immediately raises two others: Does the place have to be "logical?" Logi- cal or not, can any place provide good working arrangements unless it is picked with some regard for the actual job which the binding department is supposed to do? T h e adventures of logic in the wonder- land of library organization are well de- scribed by W i l l i a m s : 7 . . . As soon as the conditions that gave rise to the original organization have changed, and as soon as relationships are affected by tradi- tions and personalities instead of explicit regu- lations alone, every feature of the organiza- tion involves a good deal more than simple logic, and many changes suggested by logic must be made slowly or postponed to a more suitable time. T h e danger is that if too little or too late an effort is made to keep the or- 8 L i t c h f i e l d , D o r o t h y H . " D e p a r t m e n t a l and D i v i - sional L i b r a r i e s . " College and Research Libraries 2:237-40, J u n e 1941. 7 W i l l i a m s , op. cit., p. 227. ganization changing in the proper direction, it will become hopelessly inefficient and incapable of fulfilling present needs. Williams thus sums up the reasons why the place of binding in library administra- tion is so often not logical. H e also points out the dangers of putting off reorganiza- tion to the point of hopeless inefficiency because "so-and-so has had the job so many years" or "we'd have to reorganize a lot of other things if we reorganized the bind- ing d e p a r t m e n t " or "we haven't an appro- priation to keep up the department if it is reorganized." I n such cases, even if all of these conditions were eliminated, the administrator, all too often, would still find it hard to decide just where to put the binding department. • W h y is there such difficulty in locating the "logical" place of binding supervision in library administration? Perhaps an ob- vious answer may be found in the fact that binding is a vital part of the broader func- tion of conservation of library stock. But the deeper answer lies in the f u r t h e r fact that the scope of book conservation is so extensive and touches so many different library departments. Active Recognition of Facts T h e r e is an urgent need for more active recognition of these two facts. T h e r e is a need for reorienting administrative thought on the whole subject of book conservation and binding; consideration of binding and book conservation as they are today is not enough. A few librarians who have passed through the stress of reorganizations have become aware of this, and, in the reorgani- zation of the Library of Congress, this awareness became clarified into a program —or, at least, definite objectives. Conservation, as responsible custody, is the only library function which should be continuously at work twenty-four hours a 218 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES day. It is the only function which should be concerned with every piece of material in the library from the moment the selector becomes aware of its existence to the day it is discarded. T h e reason this sounds so exaggerated is that it is a forgotten platitude. I t applies to any library col- lection, whether it be of Egyptian papyrus, of the third-grade classroom library in an Iowa village, or of a university's incunabula. T h e r e was a time when library adminis- tration was simpler, when these platitudes were living, activating principles. But, with the increasing complexity of universi- ties and their libraries, the custodial func- tion of the library—the "care and custody of the collection"—has deteriorated through neglect. T h e difficulties of welding miscel- laneous collections, the slowness of growth of central libraries, and inadequate appro- priations may all have contributed to the neglect. It may seem very human and " n a t u r a l " that whatever time and money could be spared should be devoted to the things which just had to be done, the salvag- ing of material in unusable condition. But certainly this focusing on those activities of binding supervision dealing with crises has been accompanied by declining attention to prevention of crises. Some strange phenomena in the evolu- tion of library administration have resulted from this neglect of conservation. It be- came harder and harder to develop a pro- gram and procedures for book conservation, and, therefore, it was more and more neg- lected. As it withered away, it left binding supervision without any fundamental place in some library organizations. T h i s is one cause of this "stepchild" situation. Some administrators have tried to dispose of the annoying department by attaching it to all kinds of other functions, which are frequently not closely related. But few have realized that it could "logically" be attached to so many other library functions for the very reason that it is essentially a conservation function and therefore funda- mental in all library administration. T h e r e are three types of situations in which a librarian may find this analysis of direct and practical interest: ( I ) the dis- covery, sudden or gradual, of one or more of the binding troubles described at the beginning of this article; ( 2 ) the need for library reorganization, partial or complete; ( 3 ) the recognition of the fact that, im- perceptibly through the years, important parts of the collection have received in- adequate or no attention. If the foregoing analysis is at all valid and if the ten years' observations on which it is based do represent general conditions, the librarian confronted with one of the three situations may find some usable answer through these procedures: ( 1 ) ap- ply frankly to the binding department the same types of questions as those which li- brary surveyors apply to other departments; ( 2 ) through the questions indicated earlier in this article, trace out the weaknesses in the administrative relationships of the bind- ing department; ( 3 ) plan and provide for a truly broad program of book conservation ; ( 4 ) create a place for an assistant director in charge of this program, with full re- sponsibility and commensurate power. T h i s last step is, of course, one which may well involve much more than the action of one librarian in one library. I t is, es- sentially, a broad professional problem. W h e r e are the administrators who can be- come library custodians in the true and effective sense of the title, when the func- tion has for so many years atrophied ? T h i s is a problem of professional education and training and, of necessity, the spiral of making the custodian's position progres- sively more attractive and of attracting more and better trained librarians. J U L Y t 1946 20 7