Comments on: Interest in book and journal marginalia grows as Google and publishers puts books and journals online http://www.corporeality.net/museion/2009/06/05/interest-in-book-and-journal-marginalia-grows-as-google-puts-books-online/ Medical Museion @ University of Copenhagen Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:29:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: Thomas http://www.corporeality.net/museion/2009/06/05/interest-in-book-and-journal-marginalia-grows-as-google-puts-books-online/comment-page-1/#comment-247114 Thomas Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:57:19 +0000 http://www.corporeality.net/museion/2009/06/05/interest-in-book-and-journal-marginalia-grows-as-google-puts-books-online/#comment-247114 Hi Karen, thanks for this enrichment of the discussion. I think we basically agree --- as you say, scholarly interest in marginalia preceeds the internet, but the rapidly increasing number of online editions is a major stimulation for interest in the extra-printed content of archival and library texts. Hi Karen, thanks for this enrichment of the discussion. I think we basically agree — as you say, scholarly interest in marginalia preceeds the internet, but the rapidly increasing number of online editions is a major stimulation for interest in the extra-printed content of archival and library texts.

]]> By: Karen Reeds http://www.corporeality.net/museion/2009/06/05/interest-in-book-and-journal-marginalia-grows-as-google-puts-books-online/comment-page-1/#comment-247104 Karen Reeds Sun, 14 Jun 2009 17:46:23 +0000 http://www.corporeality.net/museion/2009/06/05/interest-in-book-and-journal-marginalia-grows-as-google-puts-books-online/#comment-247104 Thank you, Thomas, for taking note of my comment. I posted it to H-SCI-MED-TECH in response to Jeremy Vetter's query about guidelines for weeding out the primary sources in science in Dickinson College library. First, a quick correction: The listserve is H-SCI-MED-TECH@h-net.msu.edu. The URL for full posting is: http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-Sci-Med-Tech&month=0905&week=e&msg=2rkH%2B3vhCfoUhqS8XM%2BNdw and it gives links to 3 examples of the interest in marginalia. I think the current interest in marginalia precedes Google. I know mine goes back well before a key text on the subject for historians of medieval art, which was published well before Google was invented: Michael Camille, <em>Image on the edge: the margins of medieval art</em> (Reaktion Books, 1992). Several years earlier, when I was the science editor at Rutgers University Press, I had to turn down Mario di Gregorio's edition, <em>Charles Darwin's Marginalia</em> (ultimately published by Garland, 1990)--but with great regret because I knew it was an important a work of scholarship. The impending destruction of the paper-based literature is certainly driving part of the interest in marginalia, as you suggest; but I think it's more complex than that. I'm drawing on my own experience with early printed books in science and medicine, but I think the point applies more broadly. When the only way to see old books was to visit rare book rooms, the most productive use of my time there was to concentrate on the text proper and transcribe as much as possible. The new availability of texts online (via Google and all the wonderful institutional/personal digitization efforts) often makes it easy for me to study the text in my own study, but makes me all the more interested in seeing how generations of readers before me responded to the work. In turn, their annotations make me a better historian, because they make me notice aspects of the text and the physical object that I'd taken for granted or overlooked. That's why I urged Jeremy Vetter to look out for those unique marked-up copies and keep them in the Dickinson College collection. In the age of Google, we still need rare book rooms with expert curators--and digitization efforts should not limit themselves to pristine copies! Karen Reeds 6/14/2009 Visiting Scholar, Department of the History and Sociology of Science, University of Pennsylvania; Princeton Research Forum Thank you, Thomas, for taking note of my comment. I posted it to H-SCI-MED-TECH in response to Jeremy Vetter’s query about guidelines for weeding out the primary sources in science in Dickinson College library.

First, a quick correction: The listserve is H-SCI-MED-TECH@h-net.msu.edu. The URL for full posting is:
http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-Sci-Med-Tech&month=0905&week=e&msg=2rkH%2B3vhCfoUhqS8XM%2BNdw and it gives links to 3 examples of the interest in marginalia.

I think the current interest in marginalia precedes Google. I know mine goes back well before a key text on the subject for historians of medieval art, which was published well before Google was invented: Michael Camille, Image on the edge: the margins of medieval art (Reaktion Books, 1992).

Several years earlier, when I was the science editor at Rutgers University Press, I had to turn down Mario di Gregorio’s edition, Charles Darwin’s Marginalia (ultimately published by Garland, 1990)–but with great regret because I knew it was an important a work of scholarship.

The impending destruction of the paper-based literature is certainly driving part of the interest in marginalia, as you suggest; but I think it’s more complex than that. I’m drawing on my own experience with early printed books in science and medicine, but I think the point applies more broadly.

When the only way to see old books was to visit rare book rooms, the most productive use of my time there was to concentrate on the text proper and transcribe as much as possible. The new availability of texts online (via Google and all the wonderful institutional/personal digitization efforts) often makes it easy for me to study the text in my own study, but makes me all the more interested in seeing how generations of readers before me responded to the work.

In turn, their annotations make me a better historian, because they make me notice aspects of the text and the physical object that I’d taken for granted or overlooked. That’s why I urged Jeremy Vetter to look out for those unique marked-up copies and keep them in the Dickinson College collection. In the age of Google, we still need rare book rooms with expert curators–and digitization efforts should not limit themselves to pristine copies!

Karen Reeds 6/14/2009
Visiting Scholar, Department of the History and Sociology of Science, University of Pennsylvania; Princeton Research Forum

]]>