The national preservation program can save the contents of millions of
brittle books through mass microfilming, but many library materials with
scholarly value as artifacts also are in need of preservation. This paper
provides an intellectual rationale for consideration of the book as an
artifact and discusses possible selection strategies to provide a context
for further exploration of these issues.
Some books and documents must be preserved in original form because they
have scholarly value as objects as well as for the information they contain.
The challenge of preserving these materials, called artifacts, requires
an understanding of the scholarly value of artifacts and the development
of an effective and efficient strategy for their preservation.
Research libraries and archives collect information recorded on paper,
film, and, more recently, analog or digital tape and disks, all of which
have finite life spans. When the original paper, film, and other information
media or “formats” deteriorate sufficiently to threaten loss of the information
recorded on them, a major preservation decision needs to be made: If the
information is to be preserved, what is the most effective and economical
preservation technology to use?
The decision can be difficult because no preservation technology is perfect;
some information is lost in order to save other information, and decisions
are made to save what is regarded at the time as information most likely
to be of enduring scholarly value. Libraries and archives are filled with
examples of compromises made to preserve some information at the expense
of information considered to be of less importance. Microfilms and photocopies
capture text but commonly lose much of the detail and tonal range of illustrations.
Repairs and restorations alter original books and documents, no matter
how carefully they are done. Even library bindings change forever the appearance
of books as published by replacing original, sometimes illustrated, covers
with serviceable, if unappealing, buckram.
For books and documents whose scholarly value lies entirely in a reasonably
faithful representation of text and illustrations, the choice of an appropriate
preservation technology can be made on the bases of technical fidelity
of various reformatting technologies, the kind of access needed to the
preserved information, and relative costs. For many materials of scholarly
value at risk of loss from deterioration, microfilm is the preservation
technology of choice because microfilm “captures” text well, and the text
is of greatest scholarly value.
For materials valued for detailed, continuous-tone or multicolored illustrations,
microfilm has not proven to be a good preservation technology. Moreover,
materials made less useful by reformatting from paper to microfilm because
the mode of access is less satisfactory are not considered good candidates
for this preservation technology.
Even more challenging is the preservation of books and documents whose
original formats have scholarly value as objects. These materials have
scholarly value that encompasses both the value of the text and illustrations
and, additionally, an object or artifact” value that is inseparable from
the original format of the materials. They cannot be microfilmed without
loss of part of their scholarly value. But exactly what are artifacts,
what is their importance to scholarship, and how can artifacts be preserved
effectively and economically?
Artifacts and Information
Artifacts are often thought of in terms of rarity or uniqueness, age,
and monetary worth. Although these characteristics frequently are found
in artifacts, they do not of themselves determine scholarly value. Many
books and documents are old and rare but contain little scholarly value,
while some new documents may be of great importance. Similarly, the monetary
value of some documents as collectors’ items has little relation to those
documents’ importance to scholarship.
Most artifacts are valued primarily as evidence or proof of the accuracy
of the information they contain. Original documents are essential for many
legal and scholarly purposes as proof of authenticity. The authenticity
of text, even its legal credibility, may depend on an analysis of the format.
Erasure marks impressed upon the surface of a hand-drawn map warn that
a location or boundary may have been falsified. Pages tipped into already
bound books sometimes suggest that parts of texts may have been changed.
Pasted-on changes to a typescript distinguish an author’s original words
from those that found their way into print.
An original document is proof or evidence of how (and sometimes when and
where) the document was made: the type of paper with its watermark printing
or writing ink, the binding materials, glues, leather, and cloth. This
evidence constitutes information about the history of the technologies
involved in the manufacture of the document and often can help determine
the date of an undated or inaccurately dated document.
Some artifacts are preserved because they are exceptionally fine examples
of their technology or are artistic expressions. Some manuscripts, prints,
drawings, and photographs made to record historical events were so finely
done that they have acquired aesthetic value as well as value as historical
documents. Some bookbindings are not only exquisite examples of their craft
but also are artistic expressions wrought in leather, thus taking on the
value of museum objects.
In all of the above examples, the format itself has something to contribute
to the understanding of the book or document. Whether proof’ of authenticity, “evidence” of
manufacture, or technological or artistic expression,” at least part of
the scholarly value of the record is inseparable from its format. Can a
copy, no matter how good, of a book or document offer the same proof of
authenticity as the book or document in original form? (The admissibility
in court of copies of original documents grapples with part of this question.)
How can a facsimile provide evidence of the original manufacture of a book
or document? Perhaps some forms of artistic expression would be less dependent
upon original format if we had a preservation technology that could precisely
duplicate the original and thus carry the same expression, but to date
there is no preservation technology with this capability.
When the original form or format contributes to the scholarly value of
the record, the record becomes an artifact. Consequently, the original
format of an artifact cannot be destroyed without reducing the record’s
scholarly value. From the perspective of making a preservation decision,
should not we consider the original format to be “information” of scholarly
value comparable to the words and illustrations more typically thought
of as information?
By considering artifacts as information, artifacts could be subjected
to the same scholarly and technical review given to all records considered
for preservation. Books and documents valued exclusively for their contents
currently are preserved only if that information is deemed to be of sufficient
scholarly value to justify the cost of its preservation. Analogously, artifacts
would be preserved only if their “information” is deemed of sufficient
scholarly importance to merit preservation, knowing that preserving these
materials means preserving them in original format.
Though not the primary consideration of this paper, in addition to artifacts
there is a second category of books and documents that must be preserved
in original format. These are library materials whose information cannot
be captured by the currently available reformatting technologies of microfilming
or photocopying. Art and art history, archaeology, architecture, geology,
geography, the life sciences, and other subjects are heavily dependent
upon illustrations that feature fine details, continuous tone, and color.
Moreover, illustrated materials often are published in oversized formats
with frequent foldouts. All of these characteristics make demands beyond
the capabilities of filming and photocopying. Digitization is likely to
overcome many of the limitations of current technologies, but it is not
yet available for preservation applications. While they are not artifacts
as described above, many illustrated materials also must be preserved in
original form until a suitable reformatting technology is available for
With many materials, and illustrated materials in particular, satisfactory
preservation solutions are further limited by requirements for access.
For example, comparisons among illustrations in art history texts require
consultation of several images simultaneously, a difficult feat on a film
or fiche reader. Reference books need random access for quick look-ups,
which are not at all suited to the sequential access of the microfilm format.
Thus the reformatting technology not only must capture all significant
information, but also must provide quality of access equal to that of the
original format if it is to be fully satisfactory.
If all books and documents of significant scholarly value are to be preserved,
including artifacts and library materials for which a suitable preservation
technology is not yet available, we must extend our efforts to preserve
some records in original format. The information value of some formats
in and of themselves, limitations of current preservation technologies
to capture all significant information, and occasional special requirements
for access indicate a need for a strategy for preservation of selected
books and documents in original form.
A Strategy for Reservation in Original Format
Traditionally, libraries and archives independently have undertaken activities
to preserve their collections by providing proper housing, protection from
fire and theft, library binding, and occasional repair and restoration.
Now libraries with custody of the nation’s research collections realize
that a greater commitment of library resources is required to preserve
their very large, deteriorating collections. The single, but monumental,
problem of deterioration of library collections caused by embrittlement
of paper alone has drawn considerable national attention along with additional
Perhaps the least obvious (and most commonly overlooked) problem with the
effectiveness of any preservation technology that reproduces or alters
the original, no matter how “faithful” the reproduction or unobtrusive
the alteration, is that the scholar is left with information less reliably
accurate than that in the unaltered original format. Consequently, a preservation
strategy for artifacts might include a guideline that no treatment should
be undertaken unless the risk of damage from delay or inaction is judged
to be the greater risk.
A preservation treatment must be appropriate and economical. Its appropriateness
is measured by its ability to capture all information of significance.
The scholar must be prepared to identify now what information is significant
for current and future study in order to ensure that it is captured. Can
a scholar always tell a conservator which attributes of an artifact are
significant and must be preserved? The remote possibility of identifying
all artifactual information that will in the future be significant about
a book or document, combined with the inherent compromises between information
saved and information lost during the preservation treatment process, appears
to argue further for a preservation strategy to restrict extensive preservation
treatment only to books and documents that have artifactual significance
and that are in urgent need of treatment.
Some treatments used to preserve materials in their original formats are
very expensive. “Full conservation,” or restoration, including chemical
treatment and repair done to minimize its visual intrusiveness, can cost
several hundred to more than a thousand dollars per book or document, depending
on extensiveness of treatment. Relatively few artifacts can justify the
costs of extensive preservation treatment but, fortunately, not all artifacts
in need of preservation require extensive treatment. Most artifact treatments
undertaken in many institutional preservation programs are minor, but are
sufficient to enable the continued safe use of artifacts at a per item
cost of less than fifty dollars.
The vast majority of all artifacts could be preserved without treatment
and at low cost through preservation measures to reduce their rates of
deterioration and wear, thereby extending their lives and minimizing the
number of artifacts in need of treatment at any one time. Controlling the
environment (temperature, relative humidity, air impurities, and light
levels) reduces the rate of deterioration; protective enclosures mitigate
the effects of a poor environment or housing arrangement and reduce wear;
sensible handling and use practices help preserve artifacts for many decades
of continued research. Soon chemical treatment, ‘mass deacidification,” will
be available to reduce the rate of chemically caused deterioration. These
measures could be the major components of a strategy for artifact preservation,
with extensive treatment as a relatively minor component.
As with preservation of all library and archival materials, a strategy
for preservation of books and documents in original format needs to encompass
a justification for resources, methodologies for selection (assuming fewer
resources than needs), and a range of preservation technologies able to
match problems with solutions. Certainly artifacts could be claimed to
have scholarly value sufficient to justify significant resources for their
preservation. A preservation strategy could be crafted to meet the needs
of both the most important artifacts and those most at risk. But the success
of the effort will depend upon the involvement of scholars and librarians
not only in identifying books and documents that must be preserved in original
format, but in fully understanding the nature of the preservation problem
to be solved and in developing a strategy for its solution.
Commission on Preservation and Access
1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 740
Washington, DC 20036-2217 (202) 939-3400
The Commission on Preservation and Access was established in 1986 to foster
and support collaboration among libraries and allied organizations in order
to ensure the preservation of the published and documentary record in all
formats and to provide enhanced access to scholarly information.