Once I dropped a copy of Ian Frazier’s The Fish’s
Eye into a bathtub full of water. While reading a paperback of Nadezhda
Mandelstam’s Hope Abandoned, the spine snapped as I was marking a passage,
turning it into two volumes. The same thing happened with my copy of Mezz
Mezzrow’s Really the Blues. The cover of my Webster’s Third, a gift from
friends in 1973, detached, turning the fat dictionary into a paperback. My
old copies of Ulysses and Finnegans Wake are held together with
rubber bands. Once I left Edward Dahlberg’s Can These Bones Live on the
ground after a picnic. By the time I realized it was missing and turned the car
around to retrieve it, rain had swollen the book into a pulpy blob.
I try to soothe my conscience by recalling that
Dr. Johnson was a serial book abuser. He routinely tore the covers off
books to make them easier to read. Books were tools to be used, not trophies. He
never reformed. I have, mostly. I strive to no longer be a clumsy vandal. I don’t
even write in books. I keep notes in a notebook. I’m a reader, not a collector,
but I’m mildly neurotic when it comes to treating books with finicky delicacy.
Not Charles Lamb. Consider Henry Crabb Robinson’s diary entry for Jan. 10,
1824:
“I looked over Lamb’s
library in part. He has the finest collection of shabby books I ever saw; such
a number of first-rate works of genius, but filthy copies, which a delicate man
would really hesitate touching, is I think nowhere to be found. I borrowed
several books.”
That final sentence, amusingly understated, articulates a true reader’s credo. In a pinch, a dirty, torn or otherwise unsightly book will be sufficient. In one of his Essays of Elia, “Detached Thoughts on Books and Reading,” Lamb confirms Robinson’s observations:
“Thomson’s Seasons, again,
looks best (I maintain it) a little torn, and dog’s-eared. How beautiful to a
genuine lover of reading are the sullied leaves, and worn out appearance, nay,
the very odour (beyond Russia), if we would not forget kind feelings in
fastidiousness, of an old ‘Circulating Library’ Tom Jones, or Vicar of
Wakefield! How they speak of the thousand thumbs, that have turned over their
pages with delight!—of the lone sempstress, whom they may have cheered
(milliner, or harder-working mantua-maker) after her long day’s needle-toil,
running far into midnight, when she has snatched an hour, ill spared from
sleep, to steep her cares, as in some Lethean cup, in spelling out their
enchanting contents! Who would have them a whit less soiled? What better
condition could we desire to see them in?”
Like Lamb, I enjoy reading
copies of previously owned books – the inscription, underlinings, marginalia. A book is incomplete without readers. Their fleeting presence
confirms one’s sense of gratitude and solidarity. In another essay, “Two Races of Men,” Lamb writes of the perils of lending books to Samuel Taylor Coleridge,
his friend since childhood. He condemns “borrowers of books--those mutilators
of collections, spoilers of the symmetry of shelves, and creators of odd
volumes,” but reverses himself and writes of his friend, a
compulsive writer of marginalia:
“Reader, if haply thou art blessed with a moderate collection, be shy of showing it; or if thy heart overfloweth to lend them, lend thy books; but let it be to such a one as S. T. C. -- he will return them (generally anticipating the time appointed) with usury: enriched with annotations, tripling their value. I have had experience. Many are these precious MSS. of his -- (in matter oftentimes, and almost in quantity not unfrequently, vying with the originals) -- in no very clerkly hand -- legible in my Daniel: in old Burton; in Sir Thomas Browne; and those abstruser cogitations of the Greville, now, alas! wandering in Pagan lands. ---- I counsel thee, shut not thy heart, nor thy library, against S. T. C.”
5 comments:
Back in the '80s, I once left a textbook in the trunk of my car where, somehow, rain made its way in. The book, thoroughly wet, plumped up considerably. I took the book to class at the next meeting. The teacher took one look at it and laughed. As it happened, he had a spare copy which he gave me. He inscribed it, "Keep your powder dry."
Just bought an 82-year old Penguin. (Xenophon/Persia) Cover very good, pages slightly yellowed but supple and securely attached. Meanwhile my shelves bulge with Penguins from subsequent decades whose pages are nearly as dark as the text, brittle, loose. The paper quality in cheap editions has noticeably declined.
G.K. Chesterton is said to have been hard on books.
The widespread use of the "perfect" binding years ago mean that a lot of books, read often enough, split apart. Sometime often didn't matter, just the age: a 1964 printing of Quine's Word and Object gave on what was at least my first reading of it.
Once when my son was a newborn, I was changing his diaper with the book I was reading (Paul Fussell's Wartime) open on the table right next to him. (Because anytime is a time for reading, right?) Before I could get the diaper pinned, he shot a stream of urine into the air, and it landed right on the open pages. No big deal. My wife says that was when she knew that I would be a good father.
My copy of The Nine Tailors eventually became a multi-volume thing, saved for years till replacement. John Lukacs' Historical Consciousness has had multiple regluings -- I think maybe Schocken paperbacks were having problems with glue for a while.
Post a Comment