CUT OR UNCUT PAGES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1091, 1 April 1911, Page 9

CUT OR UNCUT PAGES.

Tho question "Why should books ever bo published with their pages uncut:- 1 " posed by Mr. Arthur C. Benson in a letter published in the ".Morning Post" on. February A, was referred to at r meeting held recently at the lloyal Society or Arts, when Mr. John Murray gave his views on the subject. Mr. Murray was presiding at a lecture byMr. George A. Stephens on "Modern Machine Bookbinding," and the lecturer contended. that since the Great Exhibition tho incessant dem.-tnd of tho public for cheap books and the acute competition of publishers and authors had combined to stimulate mechanicians to produce machines for the efficient execution of almost every process m printing and bookbinding, and the natural result to-day was a plethora of books, good, bad", and indifferent Macm.,o binding had cdmo to stay. Unfortunately', . owing to the acute stress ot competition between publishers and the demand for cheap books by tho public —who could not or who would not make a distinction between immediato and ultimate advantage—the publishers were practically compelled to avail themselves of every means which tended to lessen the cost of production. Tho inferior physical qualities of books at tho present "day 'must not bo attributed primarily to the wholesale- bookbinder. The responsibility lay with tho publisher, who was generally more concerned with low prices than with quality and serviceability. As to books "printed on the detestable featherweight paper,' or the equally execrable hcayilyloadod art paper," Mr. Stephens said it was tho publisher's object to delude book purchasers into believing that they were receiving in exchange for their cash « book containing a large amount of reading matter. These books were generally provided with, very attractive covers, as the publishers were well aware that as in-Shakespeare's'time, "the world is still deceiv'd with ornament." In a public library the average life of a publisher's binding before being repaired was,3o.issues. Books published at 255. often had bindings no better than those lon books published at_ O's. Especially ! was this true oE expensive scientiiic and -technical works, for. which a small demand was anticipated ; many of these, being translated, cost the publisher comparatively little. .Mr. .John Murray said although he had not actually bound a book with his own hands he iiad been responsible for

a great deal of binding, and he' had listened to Mr. Stephens's address with considerable interest. Considering as a publisher the question of whcth'br they should have cut edges to books "or. not, Mr. Murray said the imposition question had to be taken into consideration, because if a book was a'good book and was issued in a cloth binding many readers of it would havo.it bound in leather, and if the edges were cut over so little it would bo spoiled for over. Years ago his father issued one of Darwin's works at a time when the question he was referring to was not discussed, and ho offered it for subscription. Many thousands of copies were subscribed for, but not 10 per cent: were subscribed for with cut edges. "We lived now in a faster-going age, when very few people were, in favour of iincut edges. We were living in an.age when there existed what might be called tho curse of cheapness. People-wanted to buy everything cheaply, quite- forgetting that by buying cheaply a good market might, bo lost altogether. It was so with regard to books, and when a. book was turned out well in every'respoct the publisher got no thanks, Unles3 'ho produced books at .the cheapest, possible rate the public would not look at them. It was tho force of public opinion that compelled publishers to produce cheap ■things. As to bookbinding, wo could not in .these days compete .with, those who turned out the best work of its kind four centuries ago and specimens of which were handled as rich treasures by those who recognised their artistic worth. • The majority of the public did not appreciate such work now. Books were looked upon more as things to be .read and thrown- aside. —"Morning Post." ' ■ ■