conservation treatment – Peachey Conservation

March 18, 2026March 18, 2026

Thoughtful Deconstruction or Inappropriate Intervention?

“Thoughtful Deconstruction refers to the conscious removal of elements of a bound item to show physical aspects that were previously hidden. In this presentation I will make the case that book conservators should consider employing this approach to carefully selected bound objects so that they can then be used to foster teaching and scholarship.” —Todd Pattison, 2026 (1)

Todd, first of all I want to let you know how much I have personally benefited from your book history scholarship, and respect your conservation and bookbinding work. On top of all that you are a good egg! You have generously contributed to many organizations, and are justifiably prominent in the field.

Given your contributions, influence, and stature — and at the risk of sounding like a scolding schoolmarm — this “thoughtful deconstruction” approach is all the more disturbing. I totally support the practice of conservators interpreting objects. I totally support preserving evidence of use and existing damage in books. I totally love seeing what the insides of books look like. I totally do not support conservators taking apart books to accomplish these goals! Obviously one can do whatever they want with their own books. But advocating this as an approach for book conservators, as you did in your March 17 presentation New England GBW Chapter and in your article 2025 Suave Mechanicals 9 article, makes me uncomfortable. (2)

Have you considered how thoughtful deconstruction relates to our American Institute of Conservation Code of Ethics? Several areas are problematic: it compromises physical integrity (Article II), it prioritizes scholarship/education over preservation (Article III), and it adversely affects function (Article VI). As a Professional Member in AIC, it is also my responsibility to promote the Code of Ethics (Article XIII).

Why physically deconstruct now? Why not wait for not-to-distant future imaging or other technologies to answer your questions? What information can be important enough to compromise the integrity of an (even damaged) book? Just because a book is slightly damaged or has little current market value, does it give us free rein to intervene further?

Altering a book during the course of a treatment —which will prolong the object’s life — is different than deconstructing a structure for scholarship or education. I would also like to point out that removing a pastedown entirely is extremely unusual in current rare book conservation practice, given how invasive it is. I don’t think I’ve done it since the 1990s. Typically only the spine edge is lifted an inch or so to insert a hinge.

I have a confession. In my article in SM9, I also show an image of a lifted pastedown and removed leather on one of my own books in 2014. In retrospect, it really wasn’t necessary, but it was interesting to see that the slips were not deplyed or frayed, and that the inner face of the board squares were colored with vermillion. I think I just wanted a cool looking photo. You might say I wasn’t thoughtful enough. And at least the way I did it, it is not close to 100% reversible; which may be the case for many other people’s deconstructions as well. At this point I would rather have it intact, but like many projects I doubt I will have time to get back to replacing it.

How do we ensure careful selection of items to be deconstructed? Towards the end of your article, you mention “taking apart a volume that is destined to be destroyed and turning it into one that can teach, illustrate, or illuminate … seems a worthy thing to consider ….” I don’t think most of us would disagree; however, determining which books are essentially valueless becomes a slippery slope. Take your case study in SM9 of The Token and Atlantic Souvenir, 1834. Even if the title page and a couple of plates are missing, and you got the book for free, I consider this 192 year old book to be valuable cultural property: it is a rare embossed binding, signed by the binder, signed by the engraver, there is only one for sale on ABE for $8,500 (most of the value is from a John Quincy Adams signature), just 24 are listed in WorldCat, and it is important enough to be included in Wolf’s From Gothic Windows to Peacocks 1825 – 1855, 170.

I bet books that could be deconstructed without disagreement – say a 20th c. publishers’ binding with thousands of virtually identical extant examples – will reveal little interesting information. Books that do contain interesting innards maybe shouldn’t have been deconstructed in the first place.

Todd, please, listen to me, I’m on my knees, I’m praying that you have the strength to conquer this demon of dissectomania. You can stop turning more books into #pattisoncondition, just lay down your bookbinder’s knife, and overturn your board soaking tray!

NOTES

1. Todd Pattison, from BOOK_ARTS-L Listserv, March 3, 2026 “**REGISTRATION OPEN** THOUGHTFUL DECONSTRUCTION: A Webinar with Todd Pattison”.

2. Todd Pattison “Thoughtful Deconstruction” in Suave Mechanicals Vol. 9, (Ann Arbor: The Legacy Press, 2025): 554-580.

December 4, 2023December 5, 2023

Fish gelatin: Spreading the word about a book conservator’s new friend

Written by Ashleigh Ferguson Schieszer, Special Collections Conservator and Co-Lab Manager of the Preservation Lab of the University of Cincinnati. Reblogged with permission. Originally published 27 November 2023.

Last year around this time, the lab was fortunate to bring in book conservator and toolmaker, Jeff Peachey for a week-long intensive workshop to learn leather rebacking. While I always expect to walk away with new anticipated skills as advertised by the workshop, I’m ALSO always pleasantly surprised by the tangential tips and tricks shared along the way. In the case of Peachey’s workshop, there were many!

One of my favorites was his use of a fish gelatin. While adhering spine linings to our text blocks, Peachey pulled out a small baggie of fish gelatin he brought with him to the workshop. He poured the dry flaky powder into a small jar, added room temperature cold water, and mixed it until a liquid-y consistency. He then added strained wheat starch paste to the gelatin and mixed with water until he was happy with the consistency. He estimated it was a 40:60 ratio of gelatin to paste.

*Jeff Peachey taught a workshop at the Preservation Lab in Oct. 2022 where he first introduced us to a low-bloom fish gelatin for book conservation that didn’t require heat for use*.

If you’ve ever used gelatin before, you might be wondering – how is it possible to mix the gelatin without heating? That’s the beauty of this product – it has a high molecular weight with low bloom strength and is produced from cold water fish which gives it this ability. It might not be the strongest of the films with a 0-bloom strength, but for a book conservator doing paper repairs that need to be reversible yet strong, this combo still had an amazing tack when dry!

Peachey explained he first heard about the gelatin on a lab tour at the Weissman Center. He recalled Alan Puglia might have been the one who originally investigated the adhesive for pigment consolidation of hundreds of manuscripts for a show. The mention of a high molecular weight Norland fish gelatin was shared during a talk given at the American Institute for Conservation’s 44^th annual meeting. The talk was titled, The Challenge of Scale: Treatment of 160 Illuminated Manuscripts for Exhibition,” by Debora D. Mayer and Alan Puglia.

Peachey also doesn’t take credit for mixing the gelatin with wheat starch paste. He notes that even in Dudin’s 18^th century manual, it discusses the “union” of paste and glue in the last paragraph below.

“It is the union of the two pastes [hide glue and flower paste] which gives a great deal of strength to the back” Dudin, 1772

By the end of the week-long workshop, I had fallen in love with the properties of how well it adhered. By itself, the fish gelatin had a long working time and didn’t stick until it was nearly dry – but when mixed with wheat starch paste, it combined the best of both worlds. There was both the initial tack from the paste and a strong adhesion from the gelatin after dry. I wasted no time in ordering my own sample supply.

Over the past year, I’ve slowly incorporated the fish gelatin in treatments and testing more applications.

Ashleigh Ferguson Schieszer uses the 40:60 mixture of fish gelatin and wheat starch paste to hinge encapsulations into an album, ensuring the heavy encapsulations with paper hinges stay adhered.

I first successfully used it to hinge-in heavy encapsulated sleeves into an album containing lung cross sections. After ultrasonically welding a paper hinge into an encapsulated sleeve, I applied the mix of wheat starch paste and fish gelatin to adhere the hinge to the scrapbook stubbing and had wonderful success. I was able to adhere with confidence that the encapsulation would stay in place and was able to avoid disbinding and resewing. At one point during treatment, I found I needed to reposition a hinge. I am happy to report the mixture was as easily reversible as wheat starch paste alone!

Most recently, I played around with using it for photographic emulsion consolidation. I used it first as a barrier layer before inpainting, and then to add sheen to in-painted photograph regions that were originally matte in comparison to the surrounding gelatin coating. It seemed extremely easy to apply and clean up was less messy than other photographic gelatins I’ve used in the past. The sheen was just the right amount of gloss I needed without being overly shiny. And, best of all, no heat required.

*Examples of photographic condition issues where the fish gelatin was tested: flaking emulsion was consolidated and a barrier layer was applied before inpainting*.

We’ve also used the gelatin to stabilize breaks in a wooden box originally used to house a Richter’s architecture game from the early 20^th century. Jeff Peachey’ main use is to line spines. He’s found it not only has better adhesion than straight paste, but makes the spine feel slightly more solid and resistant to torsional forces

Applying fish gelatin to adhere spine linings

In the future, I imagine this gelatin would have excellent potential in media consolidation. In all these uses, I couldn’t be more thrilled to not have to pull out my baby bottle warmer to set a beaker of gelatin on. As a result, there was no fuss in worrying about how long the gelatin was heated and if it was losing its properties due to heat!

*Example of using a baby bottle or coffee warmer to re-heat pre-made gelatin during typical use*

In terms of shelf life, the dried granules can be kept indefinitely like unmixed wheat starch paste. Once mixed, Jeff suggests that he’s found the adhesive properties hold up for about a week in the fridge; however, it does begin to smell fishy after just a day. So unlike wheat starch paste, if you’re adverse to the fishy odor, you’ll only want to make up as much as you’re planning to use for one day.

Interested in getting your hands on some?

I found the product used at Weisman is no longer supplied by Norland, but I was able to track down what appears to be the same product through AJINOMOTO NORTH AMERICA, INC. If you’re interested in trying it, message Henry Havey, the Business Development Manager of Collagen & Gelatin at haveyh@ajiusa.com to request a sample of High Molecular Weight (HMW) dried fish gelatin.

They provided me with a 500- gram sample at no cost and confirmed it was a Type A fish gelatin with a zero bloom strength. Henry Harvey can also provide a pricing quote should you be interested in ordering a full supply which comes in 25 kg packs. They also provided the following product data info sheets.

*Fish gelatin sample acquired by the lab in a 500 gram sample bag*

While I still covet my isinglass cast films I created from boiling dried fish bladders, as well as our mammalian photographic grade type B gelatin, this HMW fish gelatin is a welcome addition I’ve added to my tool kit.

Ashleigh Ferguson Schieszer [CHPL[] – Special Collections Conservator, Co-Lab Manager

Bibliography

Dudin, M. The Art of the Bookbinder and Gilder. Trans. by Richard Macintyre Atkinson. Leeds: The Elmete Press, 1977, p. 51. (Originally 1772)

Nanke C. Schellmann, Animal glues: a review of their key properties relevant to conservation, Reviews in Conservation, No. 8, 2007, pages 55-66

Foskett; An investigation into the properties of isinglass, SSCR Journal ; The Quarterly News Magazine of the Scottish Society for Conservation and Restoration, Volume 5, Issue 4, November 1994, pages 11-14

World Sturgeon Conservation Society, A Quick Look at an Ancient Fish, 4^th International symposium on sturgeon, Oshkosh, Wisconsin, July 8-13, 2001 https://www.wscs.info/publications/proceedings-of-the-4th-international-symposium-on-sturgeons-iss4/

Soppa, Karolina; Zumbuhl, Stefan; and Hugli, Tamara, Mammalian and Fish Gelatines at Fluctuating Relative Humidity, AIC 51^st Annual Meeting, 2023

December 8, 2021December 8, 2021

New Design Delrin Hera. Two Versions. Just in Time for a Holiday Gift 2021!

Delrin heras are now available in a black rigid version and a white flexible one.

This is one of my most used tools. It almost always seems to be in my hand while working.

The white version is very flexible at the tip, making it ideal for delicate tasks, lifting fragile materials, pigment consolidation, and pressure sensitive tape removal. The super thin, translucent tip bends to almost 90 degrees, allowing precise control of downward pressure while sliding under the tape carrier. It is also perfect for gently releasing tissue repairs from remay or hollytex.

The black version of Delrin is stiffer than the white, and the tip of this tool is thicker and stronger. It is useful for lifting, inserting adhesive, smoothing repairs, general smooshing, scoring, folding, marking, holding repairs in place, rebacking, etc… . Other uses.

If you can’t decide between the two versions, the only reasonable option is to purchase both. The non-reflective surface is easy to photograph. Delrin does not rust and is food safe. But I doubt it tastes very good. Delrin, approximately 7 x .25 x .25″

PURCHASE HERE

NB: if you are interested in learning to make your own tools, we will make both of these (and 8 other tools) in upcoming Delrin and Bamboo Toolmaking workshops. More info here!