Into the Dustbin of History? The Evaluation and ...

144 College & Research Libraries March 1999

Into the Dustbin of History? The
Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic
Materials

Bradley L. Schaffner and Brian J. Baird

One of the greatest challenges facing area studies librarians today is
preservation of collections. Area studies collections in libraries, the back­
bone of international studies programs for most colleges and universi­
ties in North America, are in danger. Most materials in these collections
were published on acidic paper and poorly bound leaving them suscep­
tible to rapid deterioration. Slavic collections, for example, appear to be
in dire need of preservation treatment, but there is very little hard data
on the scope of the problem. This research project, conducted at the
University of Kansas Libraries, is the first step toward gaining a better
understanding of the overall condition of Slavic collections. A survey of
the Slavic holdings was conducted to provide statistical information on
their physical condition. Results of the survey reveal that the condition
of these collections should be cause for serious concern. However, the
problems are not so great that they cannot be overcome through careful
preservation planning and interlibrary cooperation.

he “internationalization” and tions, which include Slavic, Asian, Afri­
“globalization” of educational can, and Latin American studies, to name
curricula and library holdings a few, have been actively developed since
is currently of great interest to World War Two or earlier. Some of the
educators, scholars, and librarians. Bar­ publications held in these collections date
bara J. Ford, who recently completed her to the eighteenth century. The age of these
term as president of the ALA, champi­ collections brings the issue of their pres­
oned the theme “Global Reach—Local ervation to the forefront. Ironically, it is
Touch” to draw attention to the impor­ not the age of the publication that deter­
tance of an international perspective for mines its remaining life span but, rather,
American librarians and library collec­ the quality of materials used in its pro­
tions. Although globalization is currently duction. Unfortunately, most materials in
a hot topic among librarians and schol­ area studies collections were published on
ars, international area studies collections acidic paper with poor-quality bindings.
in academic and research libraries have These factors, more than age, lead to their
effectively internationalized library hold­ rapid deterioration. Today, area studies li­
ings for many years. These area collec­ brarians must face the challenge of pre-

Bradley L. Schaffner is Russian Studies Librarian at the University of Kansas Libraries; e-mail:
[email protected]. Brian J. Baird is Preservation Librarian at the University of Kansas Libraries; e-
mail: [email protected].

144

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 145

serving these collections or watching outside the former Soviet Union where
them turn to dust. storage conditions are often more favor­
able. However, although the physical con­
This challenge is particularly evident ditions of most Western library facilities
in the field of Slavic studies. Scholars and that house Slavic collections are good,
librarians who work with Slavic materi­ preservation is still a major issue. Storing
als have long known of the generally poor acidic materials under optimal conditions
physical quality of publications from East will increase their usable life by decades,
Central Europe and the countries of the but this does not negate the need for a
former Soviet Union. During the Soviet proactive approach to reformatting
period, and even up to the present time, embrittled materials.2
publications were/are printed on poor-
quality acidic paper. This type of paper, Reformatting is accomplished by trans­
which is often similar to newsprint, dete­ ferring the information in the original
riorates rapidly and becomes brittle, of­ item to microfilm, digital images, or pres­
ten crumbling when touched. In addition, ervation-quality photocopy facsimiles.
a poor binding can shorten a book’s us­ Whatever the approach, it is clear that
able life to between twenty and fifty years. preservation activities must take place in
both the countries of the former Soviet
Fortunately, there are many major Union and abroad. Even though the larg­
Slavic collections in academic est collections abroad have better storage
libraries outside the former Soviet facilities, they cannot rival the holdings
Union where storage conditions are of the major in-country libraries, such as
often more favorable. the 40 million volumes in the Russian
State Library in Moscow. Coordinated ef­
Exacerbating the problem of substan­ forts among countries, universities, and
dard publishing materials is the environ­ libraries would facilitate the preservation
ment in which materials are housed. Most of a substantial portion of important
libraries in East Central Europe, particu­ Slavic publications.
larly in the countries of the former Soviet
Union, were not designed to preserve Most Slavic librarians would agree that
materials. Heating and cooling systems the overall condition of materials in their
are inadequate or nonexistent, ventilation Slavic collections is poor. This perception
is poor, and many libraries have leaky is based primarily on simple observation
roofs and plumbing problems. Moreover, and anecdotal information. Very little
many collections are located in buildings work has been done to analyze the cur­
that were not intended to store books, rent condition and quality of Slavic pub­
such as private residences, churches, and lications. A few recent published reports
office buildings.1 Poor storage conditions do outline preservation programs in Rus­
greatly accelerate the deterioration of any sia and Bulgaria but devote little or no
published material, and those produced space to an evaluation of the physical con­
with inferior materials have no chance of dition of collections held by libraries in
surviving under such conditions! If noth­ these countries.3
ing is done to improve the storage envi­
ronment, it is possible that many books The research project conducted at the
published before, during, and after the University of Kansas Libraries is the first
Soviet period will not be available to fu­ step toward gaining a better understand­
ture generations of scholars researching ing of the overall conditions of Slavic col­
Slavic studies—a sad irony given this new lections. It is important to understand the
era of political and social liberalization magnitude of the problem before devel­
and openness in East Central Europe. oping a comprehensive preservation pro­
gram. Information gathered in this sur­
Fortunately, there are many major vey will be used to help determine the
Slavic collections in academic libraries best courses of action to preserve these
important area collections.

146 College & Research Libraries March 1999

TABLE 1 a timely random sampling of
Call Number Table the entire 300,000 Slavic vol­
umes housed throughout

LC Call Numbers Dewey Call Numbers the University of Kansas li­
brary system, which would
Russia/Soviet/Former Countries of the Soviet Union have required sampling ev­
ery thousandth Slavic vol­
DK1 to DK293 History 947 to 947.9507 ume distributed throughout
the libraries’ three million
DK501 to DK973 volume collection. There­
Language and Literature fore, the survey focused on
PG2001 to PG2847 491.7 to 491.799 the history and literature col­
PG2900 to PG3520 891.7 to 891.78 lections (DK, PG, and the
PG3801 to PG3957 891.79 to 891.798

Poland Dewey equivalents) because

History 914.38 to 914.38 most of the materials in these
D765.A36 to D765.2.C446
call number ranges were
D802.P6 to D802.P62 940.53437 to 940.53485 published in Slavic coun­
DS135.P6 to DS135.P63
DK401 to DK443.7 tries. The survey was further

DK4010 to 4800 943.8 to 943.86 limited to Russian/Soviet/

Language and Literature post-Soviet history and lit­
PG6001 to PG7365 891.85 to 891.858 erature and Polish history
and literature (see table 1).
Soviet/Russian materials
The University of Kansas is home to were chosen because publishers prima­
one of eleven federally funded Depart­ rily used acidic paper and continue to do
ment of Education Title VI comprehen­ so. Polish materials were evaluated be­
sive research centers for Slavic studies. cause the overall quality of their publica­
The Slavic collections number more than tions appears to have improved since the
300,000 volumes, with strengths in Rus­ collapse of the communist-led govern­
sian, Serbian, Croatian, Polish, and Ukrai­ ment. Therefore, the survey evaluated
nian materials. Given the size of the col­ publications that could be considered
lection, it would have been impossible to among the “best” and “worst” of the Slavic
inspect each volume physically. There­ publishing world. This was done to pro­
fore, a statistically valid random survey vide the most balanced view possible of
was conducted. This Slavic survey is a the condition of Slavic publications.
modified version of a survey instrument
For each item in the survey, a number
previously used to evaluate the overall of factors were evaluated including type
condition of collections at the University of volume and size; type of binding, in­
of Kansas Libraries. A description of the cluding leaf attachment and cover mate­
original survey process and its results was rial; quality of paper; condition of paper,
published in College & Research Libraries.4 text block, and binding; and overall con­
Because the general survey was devel­ dition of the publication. To ensure that
oped to evaluate the condition of more the survey results would be statistically
than three million volumes, it did not pro­ valid, at least three hundred books pub­
vide sufficient detailed information on the lished in Poland and three hundred books
physical condition of the Slavic collec­ published in Russia, the Soviet Union,
tions. and/or the successor states were evalu­

To simplify the survey process, the ated. In the end, 379 Polish and 476 Rus­
evaluation focused on an area of the col­ sian/Soviet items were randomly sampled
lection where a majority of the materials from the collections. The results of the sur­
were published in Slavic countries. It vey were rather surprising. To use an old
would have been impossible to conduct saying, there is good news and bad news.

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 147

TABLE 2 good condition.
Imprint Statistics Table 3 compares the percentage of

Imprint Date Polish Russian brittle volumes by publication date for the
1830-49 0.25% 0.42% two collections surveyed. As can be seen,
1850-69 0.76 0.84 the date of publication is a very good pre­
1870-89 2.02 1.89 dictor of paper condition. As expected,
1890-1909 2.52 5.04 preindustrial paper (before 1869) is gen­
1910-16 0.76 2.73 erally strong. By contrast, the oldest ma­
1917-29 3.53 2.94 chine-made, wood fiber papers (1870–
1930-49 3.27 4.62 1909) and early Soviet-era papers (1917–
1950s 9.82 9.66 1929) are the most embrittled. This infor­
1960s 18.39 18.28 mation should prove useful in generally
1970s 28.21 14.71 predicting the condition of volumes
1980-1984 7.30 7.14 printed during these various eras.
1985-1990 11.08 13.66
1991- 12.09 18.07 The result that will be of most interest
1960- 77.08 71.85 to librarians is the condition of the paper
in Slavic collections. After all, poor bind­
Results from the Condition Survey of ing and other physical problems can be
Slavic Materials readily corrected as long as the paper in
Based on the results of this survey, which the publication is not brittle. Table 4
must be emphasized as only the initial shows the results using a standard
step in a fuller evaluation of Slavic mate­ double-fold test for brittleness. Accord­
rials, the overall condition of Slavic pub­ ing to these results, conditions are not too
lications is not as bad as many in the field bad. Generally speaking, paper is consid­
fear. The survey revealed that 84.1 per­ ered brittle when it breaks after less than
cent of Polish materials and 60.7 percent two double-folds. Only 2.26 percent of the
of Russian/Soviet materials are in over­ Polish materials are brittle. This figure is
all good condition. This means that the actually lower than the amount of brittle
publication is currently in no need of pres­ materials found in the University of Kan­
ervation treatment. The bad news is that sas Libraries’ overall collection. The Rus­
over 95 percent of both the Polish and sian collection fares worse with 17.43 per­
Russian/Soviet holdings are printed on cent of the collection rated as brittle.6
acidic paper. Although the vast majority
of this paper is not currently brittle, it will TABLE 3
become brittle at some point in the fu­ Percentage Brittle Volumes,
ture—in perhaps as few as twenty years.
These brittle and acidic materials must by Date
undergo treatment if they are to be pre­
served for use by future generations of 1830-49 Polish Russian
scholars. 1850-69 0.0% 0.0%
1870-89 0.0 0.0
Beginning with the imprint statistics, 1890-1909 12.5
over 70 percent of the Russian and Polish 1910-16 10.0 33.3
collections were printed in 1960 or later 1917-29 0.0 50.0
(see table 2).5 However, it should be noted 1930-49 14.3 61.5
that an older publication date does not 1950s 7.7 78.6
equate to the book being brittle. Many of 1960s 5.1 27.3
the books published in the nineteenth 1970s 1.4 17.4
century were published using high-qual­ 1980-1984 0.0 28.7
ity materials. As a result, they remain in 1985-1990 0.0 22.4
1991- 0.0
0.0 2.9
0.0
0.0

148 College & Research Libraries March 1999

Over 86 percent of Polish and 43

TABLE 4 percent of Russian acquisitions
Paper Fold Test (paper breaks after) were printed on acid-free paper.
The sampled Polish books with an
imprint date of 1996 or later were
Less Than 1 Fold Polish Russian all produced on acid-free paper.
Less Than 1 Double-fold (N = 379) (N = 476) However, Russian publishers are
Less Than - Double-folds more sporadic. For example, some
Less Than 3 Double-folds 0-50- --10- high-quality academic books are
Lore Than 3 Double-folds 0-50 5-67 still being printed on acidic news­
1--6 9-66 print, whereas some short-run,
1-76 6-09 pamphlet-type publications are
95-97 76-47

The pH balance of paper plays an im­ printed on acid-free paper.
portant role in the quality and life span
Perhaps the sporadic use of acid-free
of a publication. The more alkaline the paper in the Russian publishing indus­
paper, the less likely it will become brittle try can be explained by two reasons. First,
and the longer the publication will last. the current economic situation forces
Unfortunately, Slavic materials fared many Russian publishers to use any type
poorly on the paper pH test (see table 5). of paper available. Second, Russian pub­
These statistics are similar to the results lishers in general are not overly con­
of a small survey conducted by the All- cerned about the life span of their prod­
Russian State Library for Foreign Litera­ ucts. In October 1997, very few publish-
ture in Moscow. That survey’s results
TABLE 5
showed that 93 percent of all Russian/

Soviet materials published between 1860 Paper pH
and 1985 were printed on acidic paper.

Between 1990 and 1995, this figured Polish Russian

dropped to 84 percent of all items pub­ Acidic 94.71% 87.18%
lished on acidic paper.7 Slightly Acidic 1.71 8.82
Alkaline 4.53 3.99
Fortunately, the trend to use acid-free
paper is continuing, as indicated in the

results of the University of Kansas sur­ ers expressed interest in attending a con­

vey. There has been a significant increase ference held in Moscow to discuss the use

in the use of acid-free paper in both Po­ of permanent (acid-free) paper. Many
land and Russia. Since 1991, over 29 per­ publishers did not know about acid-free

cent of all volumes published in Poland paper, and still others felt that preserva­

and over 15 percent of all volumes pub­ tion issues were not their affair.8
Another factor that determines a
lished in Russia have been printed on
acid-free paper. Furthermore, a test evalu­ publication’s durability is the quality of
ating the condition of all new Polish and its binding. A good binding can extend
Russian acquisitions at the University of the life of a publication, even if the publi­
Kansas Libraries during spring 1998 re­ cation is printed on acidic paper. The re­
vealed an exponential improvement. sults of this survey indicated that bind­
ings of Slavic materials do not

TABLE 6 break down as quickly as one
Condition of Binding might expect (see table 6). Clearly,
the Polish bindings rank far higher

-n -ood -ondition Polish Russian in quality to their Russian coun­
Sent to Stacks as is 87.15% 56.51% terparts. Although many of the
Seeds Preservation Treatment 39.71 Russian bindings were not in good
5.79 condition, they remain strong
7.75 3.78 enough to return to the stack for

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 149

TABLE 7
research and academic libraries have been
Place of Printing
conducted, but these surveys do not re­
port any specific findings on the condi­

Warsaw Polish 56.93% tion of Slavic holdings. The results from
Wroclaw Russian 13.85 these general evaluations indicate that the
Krakow 11.34 percentages of material needing preser­
vation vary by institution, based on geo­
Moscow 61.34% graphic location of the library and the
quality of the storage facility. This sug­

Leningrad/St. Petersburg 16.81 gests that surveys on Slavic holdings will
produce similar varying results. Finally,
Kiev (Ukraine) 6.51 the most important step will be to evalu­

ate holdings “in-country” (in Russia,
further use before needing preservation Ukraine, Poland, and elsewhere in East
treatment.
Central Europe) to gain a true idea of the
Only a few cities in each country pub­ overall condition of Slavic collections.
lished a majority of the volumes housed Information accrued from these evalua­
in the collections. This information will tions will enhance our understanding of
be useful for establishing future coopera­ the challenges inherent in attempting to
tive preservation activities with publish­ preserve Slavic publications.
ers and libraries (see table 7).
Based on this initial survey, Slavic pub­
As the final step in the survey process, lications do not appear to be as fragile as
each item received an overall preserva­ often believed. Working to preserve col­
tion treatment recommendation. Again, lections is not yet at the point of crisis,
these results show that things are not as and there is still time to consider preser­
hopeless as sometimes feared, with less vation options. However, it is clear that
than seven percent of items surveyed preservation planning and work need to
needing some kind of immediate preser­ begin now, before materials deteriorate to
vation treatment. This figure almost the point where they cannot be saved.
doubles the results obtained for the Uni­ Steps must be taken to preserve these re­
versity of Kansas’s overall library collec­ sources collectively because it is not fea­
tions but still represents a manageable sible to expect each library to have the
number of volumes (see table 8).9
resources available to preserve all of its
The results of this survey should lend holdings individually.
hope to preservation efforts. Most of the Currently, a number of vendors such

items sampled are in acceptable condition as East View Publications, IDC,
and can be preserved before it is too late, Chadwick-Healey, and Norman Ross ac­
particularly if libraries make efforts to tively film Slavic titles. However, vendors
work cooperatively to maximize collec­ tend to focus on the preservation of big-
tive resources.
ticket items such as newspaper runs or
multivolume publications. Naturally, the
What Is to Be Done?
vast majority of Slavic publications do not
This survey is the first step in evaluating fall into this category. Moreover, not ev-
the quality of Slavic collections. Ad­

ditional work needs to be com­ TABLE 8
pleted, including the evaluation of Treatment Decision for Volume
more sections of the Slavic holdings

at the University of Kansas Librar­ In good condition Polish Russian
ies. More important than this is the Sent to stacks as is 84.13% 60.71%
evaluation of Slavic collections held Needs preservation treatment 34.03
in other libraries. Evaluations of the 9.82
condition of general collections in 5.54 6.72

150 College & Research Libraries March 1999

erything published in the Soviet Union important publications in its collections
and its successor states needs to be pre­ in need of preservation treatment and
served, although much does. Thousands submit the title to the SlavCopy electronic
of publications provide valuable insight mail list. Other libraries can then order a
into the Soviet system and the develop­ copy of the item, thus reducing costs for
ment of the subsequent independent every institution involved. Currently,
states. It would be unfortunate for future SlavCopy participants are limited to
students and scholars of the region if li­ North America. The program needs to in­
braries allowed these books to disappear vestigate ways to expand its efforts to in­
through neglect. clude libraries in East Central Europe.
These cooperative programs are the most
Of course, the preservation of Slavic efficient and cost-effective methods to
materials is not simply limited to vendor preserve our collections and should be
projects. Many libraries have preserva­ used to their fullest advantage.
tion programs in operation. In addition,
there are a number of cooperative pres­ In general, the results of this prelimi­
ervation programs such as the Slavic and nary study indicate that the majority of
East European Microfilm Project Slavic area materials are currently in ac­
(SEEMP) at the Center for Research Li­ ceptable condition. However, the statis­
braries and the independently operated tics prove that the majority of the publi­
SlavCopy cooperative program. cations are printed on acidic paper, which
means they will deteriorate rapidly. Our
SEEMP, like vendors, has thus far fo­ tasks are to provide proper housing and
cused on the preservation of big-ticket maintenance to delay deterioration and to
publications. It provides libraries with the reformat those materials that have surpassed
opportunity to pool their Slavic collection their usable shelf life. Libraries must work
resources, both materials and money, to collectively to combat this problem be­
preserve items that individual libraries cause no one library can do it alone.
would be unable to save on their own.
Member institutions of SEEMP propose In the history of mankind, there has
and work on joint preservation projects. never been greater period of publication
For example, a library may have an in­ than the twentieth century. The responsi­
complete run of a newspaper. Through bility for collecting the millions of vol­
the coordinated efforts of SEEMP, other umes of works includes the extraordinary
libraries’ holdings can be used to fill in task of preserving them for future gen­
these gaps. erations. If this responsibility is taken
lightly, important parts of our history will
SlavCopy is another coordinated pro­ be lost in the dustbin. In the area of Slavic
gram that allows libraries to preserve studies, acidic paper is statistically the
Slavic publications cooperatively and greatest threat to preservation. Although
economically on a title-by-title basis.10 the tide is turning and publishers are us­
Books that cannot be preserved commer­ ing acid-free paper more frequently, the
cially (i.e., that cannot be sold to recoup damage is done on the Soviet-era publi­
expenses and a profit for the vendor) can cations. It is up to us to save what we can.
be saved through archival quality photo­ As this study shows, only a few materi­
copying. Companies such as Bridgeport als are in need of immediate attention.
National Bindery in Agawam, Massachu­ This gives us time to devise collective
setts, are willing to make as few as one preservation strategies for the majority of
high-quality copy of a book that is no our Slavic collections before they begin
longer covered by copyright laws. Par­ to crumble on the shelves. Cooperative
ticipation in SlavCopy allows libraries to programs will provide the most efficient
coordinate their preservation activities and cost-effective ways to preserve these
and reduce Slavic preservation costs collections. We must work to build these
through group/volume discounts. Each programs now.
library has the responsibility to identify

Evaluation and Preservation of Slavic Materials 151

Notes
1. For an excellent short description of the condition of Russian libraries, see Galina
Kislovskaya, Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate: A Report from Russia (Wash­
ington, D.C.: The Commission on Preservation and Access, 1996), 4–5.
2. See, for example, James M. Reilly, Douglas W. Nichimura, and Edward Zinn, New Tools for
Preservation: Assessing Long-Term Environmental Effects on Library and Archives Collections (Wash­
ington, D.C.: The Committion on Preservation and Access, 1995).
3. Ani Gergova et al, National Program for the Preservation of Library Collections (Sofia: Union
of Librarians and Information Services Officers and Open Society Foundation, 1997); Kislovskaya,
Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate.
4. Brian Baird, Jana Krentz, and Brad Schaffner, “Findings from the Condition Surveys Con­
ducted by the University of Kansas Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 58 (Mar. 1997): 115–26.
5. Most of the material published between 1830 and 1869 would be housed in the KU Rare
Books Library.
6. The University of Kansas Libraries’ percentages of embrittled volumes is sure to be much
lower than those found by other research libraries around the country. This conclusion is based
on the fact that the University of Kansas Libraries’ overall condition survey showed that only six
percent of its collections are brittle. Other libraries throughout the country have found that as
much as 25 percent of their collections are brittle. Therefore, one can expect to see a proportional
increase for the brittleness of Slavic materials. Such an increase will dramatically increase the
number of brittle Slavic materials in some library collections. See Baird, Krentz, and Schaffner,
“Findings from the Condition Surveys,” 122.
7. Kislovskaya, Preservation Challenges in a Changing Political Climate, 18.
8. “Permanent Paper Conference Aims to Raise Awareness in Russian,” Preservation & Ac­
cess International Newsletter, no. 1, Mar. 1998. Available at: http://www.clir.org/pubs/pain/
pain01.html.
9. Baird, Krentz, and Schaffner, “Findings from the Condition Surveys,” 121.
10. Libraries can participate in Slavcopy by sending an e-mail to: [email protected].