Joseph A. Dane (Professor of English at USC) has written an introductory text to bibliography that is lucid, and for the most part, fun to read. After assigning my book history class large sections of Philip Gaskell’s A New Introduction to Bibliography last year, I decided I needed a different text. I am glad I heard about Dane’s book, which offers a lighter touch with an update on early 21st century views of hand press bibliography. The book does reveal its postmodernism at certain points, but it is easy to either dive into it or avoid it.
The book’s title, What is a Book? is deceptively simple. It lets readers know they will encounter an investigation into the material aspect of the book, but once Dane starts his discussion, it quickly becomes obvious that the answer to the question is continuously elusive. The issues involved are discussed in two sections – the first provides an overview of the material book and the latter a history of book-copies.
Dane’s tone is very welcoming to the reader first encountering bibliography. He lets the reader know about important reference materials and key readings in the field and offers rich illustrations for all his points. He is also clear that it is unnecessary to be versed in every aspect of the field and to know every vocabulary word in order to apply bibliographic techniques to various projects. In fact, he barely discusses the workings of the printing press. The definitions of many words are debated, he claims, but one must have a basic understanding of terms to follow the debates of scholars. Ultimately, Dane’s goal was to challenge the grand narratives and assumptions that are now commonplace in book history and bibliography.
One way he attempts to shift the thinking of bibliographers and book historians is by continuously focusing on the difference between the book and book-copy. The book copy is the individualized material object that people hold and use, while the book is an abstract concept that allows people to speak of many copies as a unit. Too often the notions blur into one another, and Dane says this leads to false conclusions. There are so many possible ways to bring uniqueness into a book-copy, that he comes close to saying that there is no such thing as a book.
The first three chapters offer an excellent and fast-paced overview of bibliographic terms and basic materials. He then moves on to the study of the press and begins to show just how many variants can be introduced into any copy of a book. Bibliographers of the early 20th century (McKerrow, Greg, Bowers) looked at the press in order to eliminate its influences and get as close as possible to a perfect text (the narrative or argument expressed through a book as opposed to the material aspect of the book) that expresses authorial intent. Dane notes that since the late 20th century, thinkers have come to the conclusion that this is a mirage and that there is only a continuously changing “public text,” as Jerome McGann puts it. Dane is unwilling to say that this perpetual modification of a text creates a past that is unknowable. Instead, it creates a situation that is extremely obscure. He laments at the end of the book that, “for the most important things, no amount of methodological study will finally do any good” (232). In other words, bibliography can help us understand much, but we must check our hubris at the door when we deal with early printed books.
Overall, the material side of the Dane’s book seems richer, while the book-copy chapters seem less refined. In particular, the chapter on electronic book databases left this reviewer wanting deeper analysis. But that is a small criticism to make to such a good introductory text that explores theoretical issues of the book and book-copy without overwhelming the beginning student of bibliography.
Dane’s “What is a book?” answers the question asked. Dane delves into how early books were made. He speaks about the type of vellum that a book was printed on and whether it was chosen because of durability or for luxury. Dane also touches on how big books were. He mentions that large books were mostly for decoration and never touched. He gives the example of Chaucer’s books that were never touched because of their large size. When the books were transformed into smaller books individuals began reading them because they were transformed into something that could fit on their shelves. Dane discusses that large folios are heavy and can take up a whole desk causing the reader to have to stand to read the book. He mentions that librarians at institutions that carry large folios would not be happy if they had to reach up and take down one of those heavy books. He also reviews ink, paper, print, watermarks, and word revisions that were made to famous books (for example: Chaucer originally referred to his poetry as “my makynge” and it was changed to “my mockynge”). Dane gives the example that if a picture frame lacks a painting that it is just a picture frame and not a painting, and regardless to if a book has anything written on the pages or not it is still considered a book. All an individual has to see is the binding and they will call it a book. I like the comparison that Dane makes between the empty picture frame and the book because If a picture frame lacks a picture then we certainly would not call it a painting, but we would most certainly call a binding (regardless of if we see the inside or not for its content) a book.
Dane’s book started off for me answering ‘What is a Book?’ simply by explaining the difference between book and book-copy. It was interesting to me throught the book how he uses book-copy as a single example of the overall concept of the book. His importance of how each copy effects our take on the overall concept of the book reminded me of my English Master’s classes and how each edition we had of Shakespeare effected our take on the work. I enjoyed his in-depth explanations of page layout and the effects printers had on what the author intended. In fact, during the Ersatz Book 1 chapter I realized how the printer used to act as what a publisher does nowadays. The printer was the editor and copyrighter and printer all rolled into one place. He explains how Bowers calls for facsimile’s to be the original unedited version. It intrigued me to wonder what versions of Shakespeare and Milton and many other texts were we studying in graduate school. I also enjoyed when he showed the varying versions of Shakespeare as well as examples of printing errors winding up in what scholars know of Shakespeare’s works. It was also interesting to see in Othello where even through proofreading, the word Indian was in a quarto, but the word Judean was in the Folio and both come from a misreading of letters. One that can effect the study of the passage to literary scholars. All in all, Dane’s book is a great example of books and their book-copy and how each effect the identification of the overall book theme. It gave me a different way of looking at texts and a belief that literary departments should start to look at the book-copy more often and it’s effect on individual readers.
Dane’s book was more fun than I expected it to be. I’ve come to this class with no prior knowledge about book history, and I found “What is a Book?” to be approachable and filled with bibliographic information that was introduced in a manner that could have easily left me feeling alienated by my lack of knowledge, but which, instead, inspired curiosity.
There were many points worth discussing, and I was especially interested in the chapter that explained illustrations. In those pages Dane describes how illustrations were made and reused by printers. Although it makes perfect sense, this reuse was a bit of a surprise to me. I had not considered the time and resources involved in illustrating a book. It’s more efficient create reusable plates that can be employed like type. As these illustrative plates would be the printers’ property, Dane wrote, it may be possible to identify a printer with little more than the art, as each printer would have its own set of wood cuts, metal plates, etc., with which to produced graphic representations. Lastly, I was also taken with the section describing blockbooks. Dane did not imply this, but these image-rich pages with small text blocks struck me as early comic books. I couldn’t resist sharing that bit of information with friend who is a comic book collector. I would be interested in exploring blockbooks further.
Dane’s book provided a great overview of bibliography and book history. The concept I found to be the most interesting was the distinction between a book and a book-copy. Dane explains that books are an abstract concept, one that shows all book-copies identically. Book-copies, on the other hand, have an individual and exclusive history. Noticing the difference between these two subjects provides a different and greater understanding to the specifics of book history.
When reading “What Is a Book?,” my impression was that this book provides an extremely comprehensive presentation on the topic of book history. I felt that I had been given a very thorough explanation of the topic, but also one written in a very clear style, with clearly defined terms. I found the sections on illustration and on facsimiles/forgeries to be particularly interesting. I thought that Dane succinctly defined the technical terms involved, and that he provided unusual and interesting historical information as well. For example, in discussing illustrations, he provides the example of the Terence character, a case in which the same woodcut character gets used repeatedly for different plays. This struck me as esoteric, and interesting in that it serves to convey the nature of medieval printing to the modern reader. When reading the section on ersatz books, I found it interesting to learn about the original function of facsimiles and to become familiar with the terms involved. Overall, from Dane’s book, I felt that I had encountered a comprehensive perspective on the topic of book history, which enhances an appreciation of the topic.
Response from Herb Rubenstein: “What is a Book”, by Joseph Dane were that this work covered the subject of the evolution of book manufacturing very comprehensively. The chapter relating to the formatting of pages in a book were quite informative. The author describes all of the elements of what constitutes a book in minute detail. I felt somewhat overwhelmed by the voluminous amount of information that was contained in this book starting with a detailed description of the codex and folios, quartos, octavos, etc. The mathematical formulas involved in the collation process regarding the creation of a book was also delved into in this book. The entire process was fascinating. Everything from the manufacture of paper to the creation of watermarks are also discussed in this work. Overall, I found the book to be quite dense with facts and information about the history of the book trade. This is a very useful reference source for the archival profession, particularly as it reefers to rare books and it is a very useful addition to library.
Response from Roger Reyes: Before I read the book I read a review by Margaret Heilbrun (Library Journal) that had me concerned about the reading ahead of me. She obviously did not like the book or the author. She made him sound like a maniacal egotist, And claimed the book would leave my head spinning, not a positive outlook. I was surprised to find that I enjoyed the book. The plain language explanations Along with written and visual examples made it easy for me, a novice, to uderstand the subject matter. There were numerous slights towards bibliographers so I would imagine Margaret Heilbrun is a Bibliographer and I could see how this book upset her. As far as the rhetorical tic is concerned, this is educational material and should leave the reader wondering and thinking… He simply gave us the questions to ponder.
Response from Andy Maravegias: Joseph Dane’s, “What Is a Book?” seemed a little dry and repetitious, especially when he kept talking about the folios, quartos, octavos, and such. But his book was very interesting and informative nonetheless. The one part of the book that caught my eye and found interesting was the part (around page 80) when Dane was talking about the mechanics of the press and its levels of variation. Most single letter errors that are upside down can be picked up by the typesetter, but a letter such as an ‘n’ or ‘w’ upside down might not be so obvious. This is where a skilled proofreader will find these mistakes. It never occurred to me that this can be a problem, but makes sense. Also, when Dane was mentioning how focusing on the chain lines and wire lines could show the historical differences in the structure of the paper seemed interesting. The formula that Meulen constructed to find the position of the watermarks seemed rather time consuming and tedious, yet compelling. I agree with what Dane said, and it seems to fit appropriately with the class since we are all getting introduced to this when he said, “The best way to understand changes in paper manufacture is to spend time looking at books from the 15th – 19th century, then look at more books from the 15th-19th century.