Glassine d/ws: keep or discard?

First, the presence of the LEC glassine wrappers is not of major importance to me, although I am tickled when they are present.

Now, what do you do with these things when you get them? Do you retain them on the book or chuck 'em?

As for myself, if the glassine is in pristine condition (i. e., not browned & brittle) and reasonably complete, I will keep them on the book.

However, since glassine is inherently acidic, when they begin to brown and become brittle, it is a sign of deterioration and it is time to discard them, which I do. To keep them in contact with the binding will hasten the binding's demise, as the acid in the glassine will transfer to the binding.

Technically, even those which have not begun to brown are acidic and even those should, from an archival/preservation perspective, be discarded.

So, keep or discard? What is your practice?

If it's still there I've been holding onto it. Although I was not aware it was acidic, so I may be tossing a fair amount of it out! Thanks for passing along that info!

>1 Glacierman: Are you sure about the acidic part?

If in reasonable condition, I’ve been keeping them, but not on the shelved books - separately in a storage cabinet. (Of course, I’ll have a heck of a time trying to match them up with their books, if I ever needed to.) in truth, I consider them part of the packaging, not part of the book, and I keep them largely due to an irrational reluctance to discard anything original to the publication.

I discard them.

I like buying LECs with glassine - when it's present without tears, very often it's a sign the book has been rarely handled and is likely to be in mint or near mint condition. However, as soon as I receive the book, glassine goes straight into the bin. It looks incredibly ugly even when pristine, let alone when within the usual range of conditions found on older LECs.

>3 BuzzBuzzard:
My understanding is that because of its production process, glassine tends to deteriorate relatively fast, and sooner or later even originally ph-neutral, acid-free archival glassine turns into an acidic mess.
Here is a take on this by a Kew Gardens senior conservator:
http://cool.conservation-us.org/byform/mailing-lists/cdl/1998/0366.html

Even those conservationists who use glassine replace it regularly. As an example, a lady from New York University's Conservation Center who admitted to "having proffered the advice to use neutral glassine for interleaving works on paper", still says "neutral glassine will not remain neutral indefinitely, especially if placed in contact with acidic materials. It should be replaced periodically."
http://cool.conservation-us.org/byform/mailing-lists/cdl/2013/0534.html

>3 BuzzBuzzard: When it goes brown and gets brittle, it is acidic.

>6 elladan0891: Thanks for the additional information! And like you, I do like to get 'em with the original glassine on when I can, but then it goes into the trash can having served its purpose.

>6 elladan0891: My thoughts exactly!

Interesting discussion! I have always kept the original glassine, though I take it off the books for the time I read them. All of the books in glassine that I have are preserved better than these without it, even if glassine is only partial now, with parts missing.
I did not know about it being acidic, and this is a concern, though I do not see any acidic effects from old glassine on the books yet. Maybe I will get rid of some of the brownish and partial glassine covers just in case...

I too, did not know about the acidity. I'll probably spend this weekend throwing away glassines.

>1 Glacierman: What evidence do you have that glassine is acidic? Certainly that it deteriorates with age under exposure to the sun is no reason to assume it's acidic. Currently available glassine is not acidic. I have no idea if the glassine that the LEC used is acidic or not but I'd love to know if anyone has factual knowledge on this topic rather than hearsay. I often buy LECs with damaged glassine, which I discard, but I've never noticed that the glassine has damaged the binding. In fact, I prefer to buy LECs with glassine because in my limited experience the books are in better shape than those sold without glassine.

>11 kdweber: Ken, check the links I posted in >6 elladan0891:. Conservationists say that even non-acidic glassine breaks down as time passes and becomes acidic.

I'm pretty sure I have a LEC with damage to the sides of endpapers caused by glassine. I'll try to find it in the evening.
Still, as I said earlier, I also prefer to buy LECs in glassine, even though I disgard it right away.

>12 elladan0891: Thank you. Just what I was looking for; though, I should have followed the link earlier. Not really a problem for me as I dislike and discard glassine wrappers. I do use DURA-LAR to protect some fine editions (usually those without slipcases) though not LECs. It does make one wonder if they should avoid purchasing LECs with glassine wrappers but I'll probably continue my current practice since I've had good luck with it.

>13 kdweber:
I've had good luck with them too. I would be more worried if LECs were commonly bound in paper, but it seems that buckram, cloth, and even leather are affected considerably less.

After looking at some books, I have decided not to get rid of glassine wrappers. As all of us noted, we ourselves tend to be more willing to buy books that have such wrappers, and, if my children will ever want to sell my book collection, the books with wrappers intact will be more willingly purchased by other collectors. Plus, I looked at a few of my books with yellowed/darkened glassine covers, and I did not detect any discoloration of the bindings under the covers. In my observation and experience of purchasing LEC books, the original wrappers are saving most books from sunning (not that it matters for my books, as I keep them away from direct light).
So, I am leaving the covers as they are, and this will also save me time...

Keep or discard is a personal choice, for certain. That they do act as a protective cover is true and you have to balance that with whatever damage that might be done over time.

I gave my reasons for discarding them, but was curious as to what others do with them, thus this topic. I am finding your responses most interesting.

I received a book today with its original, rather shoddy glassine wrapper.
When I removed it I found that the front cloth board was marked - see photo.
The marking almost certainly seems to be a sort of residue from the glassine.
So >16 Glacierman: I will not be retaining any of these covers, and will ask sellers who advertise their book as with a glassine cover to remove it and check the condition of the boards.

>17 Constantinopolitan: I've seen that before. In those cases, it was apparent that at some point, some small amount of water had gotten onto the glassine, soaked through then dried in situ. This results in the affected glassine wrinkling as it dries while transferring some of its coating to the boards. This may be what happened here as I note the corner of yours seems to have the crinkling associated with water and the damage to the boards is what I would expect in such a case.

Any way you look at it, it ain't good!

>17 Constantinopolitan: Does it brush off?

>19 kdweber: I tried gently rubbing the cloth and then, as that was not working, I used some specialised powder based cleaner that I've had success with in the past; however I have not managed to remove any of the marks.
>18 Glacierman: "Any way you look at it, it ain't good!" When you're right, you're right!

>20 Constantinopolitan: That glassine deposit on my book is still there despite efforts to safely remove it. There is a product I wish to try, but I have to find it first. I had some in the house some years ago, but all my bookbinding supplies went into storage for lack of space in the house and I have to see if I can locate it and then test it to see if it is still viable. I have looked for it online with no success but as I don't remember the name of the product, that's no surprise. However, it may not be available any more, either.
     It is used to remove the remains of whatever had previously been pasted into a book (bookplates, library pockets, etc.) I have used it in the past to remove various labels and in one case, the remains of a bookplate that a previous owner had attemed to remove with only partial success. I also had a d/j that got a bit wet and stuck to the book. When I removed the d/j, part of it adhered to the cover and front pastedown and this stuff removed it with no damage to the book.
     Lacking that you might try a bit of paper towel that has been dampened and then wrung dry. It might take several attempts to remove the gunk, but if done judiciously, w/o getting the book wet, it may succeed. LMK if you try this and what the results were.