Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[esquirecomics]

[esquirecomics]

This conversation began in the Restoration Section in the thread about the results from Matt Nelson's pressing demonstration. The contents soon spilled over into a substantive debate. It was accurately pointed out that this discussion was an aside to the topic of the thread. As I dislike when a thread gets pulled off topic, I will initiate a separate thread in the General Section here.

 

I have been responding to Matt Nelson's substantive comments wherein he has tried to explain his expert opinions regarding restoration, conservation and pressing. I do not believe any of the questions below have been substantively answered by Mr. Nelson.

 

I do not see this as attacking in any way, intimidating or hostile. Mr. Nelson is an expert in this field and I do not see why he would be unwilling to address these questions. I am not looking for him to persuade me towards his positions, but I would like to better understand them. If anyone thinks these questions are inappropriate, then please state so and indicate why you think so.

 

I've posed similar questions to Tracey Heft and Susan Cicconi, both recognized experts (and Mr. Nelson's peers) in the restoration field and neither have been unwilling to engage in a back and forth substantive and professional dialogue. And Mr. Heft, as everyone knows, openly conducts commercial pressing so this is clearly not my attempt to isolate Mr. Nelson.

 

Questions

 

(1) How do you define conservation? In what respect does pressing constitute conservation? Is your definition of conservation supported by any of your peers or professional organizations that relate to the appropriate fields?

 

(2) Do you not believe there is an ethical requirement to disclose conservation treatment? If not, why would the ethical obligations that bind your area of expertise only apply to restoration and not conservation? Can you find any support from among your peers or professional organizations that relate to the appropriate fields that conclude conservation does not need to be disclosed?

 

(3) Should Overstreet maintain its definition of restoration as including pressing, will you adopt that position or continue to reject it?

 

[shadroch]

Mark,

1) How do you define conservation.

I'm curious what methods you consider conservation and not restoration.Can you boill down your aurguments and in three sentences or less,define your stance in its entirety?

[OldGuy]

I think he has an e-mail address.......

[FFB]

Here's my question for Matt Nelson:

 

Matt, is my AF#15 in the mail yet?

[awe4one]

1) How do you define conservation.

 

That's an easy one...

 

An attempt to reclassify well-accepted restoration procedures in an attempt to make them more palatable to collectors who don't care to own or shy away from restored books...

 

Jim

[esquirecomics]

Mark,

1) How do you define conservation.

I'm curious what methods you consider conservation and not restoration.Can you boill down your aurguments and in three sentences or less,define your stance in its entirety?

 

Shad, I honestly have to give this further thought and explore the professional definitions because I have not yet decided for myself where I stand on the restoration vs conservation debate, although I do recognize that certain treatments can be separately catagorized and I have no objection to that.

 

The question was posed because Matt initially claimed pressing was conservation, and I simply don't follow that logic as I cannot fathom how pressing conserves the life or structure of the book as I understand the term to be used. He seemingly then retracted that position, which perks my interest even more because it seems to indicate a moving target.

[FFB]

Mark,

1) How do you define conservation.

I'm curious what methods you consider conservation and not restoration.Can you boill down your aurguments and in three sentences or less,define your stance in its entirety?

 

Shad, I honestly have to give this further thought and explore the professional definitions because I have not yet decided for myself where I stand on the restoration vs conservation debate, although I do recognize that certain treatments can be separately catagorized and I have no objection to that.

 

The question was posed because Matt initially claimed pressing was conservation, and I simply don't follow that logic as I cannot fathom how pressing conserves the life or structure of the book as I understand the term to be used. He seemingly then retracted that position, which perks my interest even more because it seems to indicate a moving target.

 

The one way that pressing could be considered "conservation" is if the book is so warped or creased that a pressing is necessary to prevent someone from catching an edge whenever the book is being inserted into a mylar sleeve. Under these circumstances, I would consider it to be conservation and restoration. Otherwise, I think it's just restoration (albeit a very minor kind, since what you're left with is all original material).

[shadroch]

Mark,

This is my problem with you on this issue.You are aggressively chasing an issue,yet you haven't said how you stand on it,yourself.

Like it or not,you have emerged as the poster-boy,flag-bearer of the anti-pressing cartel. I think you should define some of your beliefs on the subject. Is there legitamite conservation,or is it just double-talk for undisclosed restoration.

I'd much prefer a discussion on this,where I know where both players stand,then an interagation,which is how I'm seeing it now.

This issue isn't going anywhere.Take some time and come up with a one paragraph creed,so we can all compare and contrast your two beliefs. Could be,theres a lot more common ground than anyone realizes.

[esquirecomics]

Mark,

1) How do you define conservation.

I'm curious what methods you consider conservation and not restoration.Can you boill down your aurguments and in three sentences or less,define your stance in its entirety?

 

Shad, I honestly have to give this further thought and explore the professional definitions because I have not yet decided for myself where I stand on the restoration vs conservation debate, although I do recognize that certain treatments can be separately catagorized and I have no objection to that.

 

The question was posed because Matt initially claimed pressing was conservation, and I simply don't follow that logic as I cannot fathom how pressing conserves the life or structure of the book as I understand the term to be used. He seemingly then retracted that position, which perks my interest even more because it seems to indicate a moving target.

 

The one way that pressing could be considered "conservation" is if the book is so warped or creased that a pressing is necessary to prevent someone from catching an edge whenever the book is being inserted into a mylar sleeve. Under these circumstances, I would consider it to be conservation and restoration. Otherwise, I think it's just restoration (albeit a very minor kind, since what you're left with is all original material).

 

Fair point and an honest answer Scott. In fact, Tracey Heft, if I recall, also designated pressing as conceivably falling within both restoration and conservation, and you have explained a very good possible example of why that might be.

 

With all due respect to Matt then, why can't he simply answer the question in a similar fashion (with, of course, leaving out the restoration part as he doesn't see pressing as restoration)?

[Shield]

Ok, one more question for Matt Nelson:

 

1. Do you currently work for Hertiage ?

[esquirecomics]

Ok, one more question for Matt Nelson:

 

1. Do you currently work for Hertiage ?

 

Shield, as much as I would like to know the answer as well, this would be a better question for Heritage to answer as Matt certainly has an understandable interest in protecting the identities of his customers.

[Mushroom]

Mark,

1) How do you define conservation.

I'm curious what methods you consider conservation and not restoration.Can you boill down your aurguments and in three sentences or less,define your stance in its entirety?

 

I am interested in this one as well. Having collected art for as many years as I can remember and having actively participated in conserving water colour art I can say that the general differential in the art world between restoration and conservation is that restoration is permanent and conservation can be removed.

 

As an example of this:

 

A water colour with severe rust can undertake a process whereby air is forcibly blown through the paper fibres and thereby removes up to 90% of the rust residue. the remaining 10% is covered in art crayon (pastel). Because the crayon can be removed without damage then this process is called conservation.

 

If the painting had been touched up with paint or ink and therefore the work could not be removed then it would be regarded as restoration.

 

Taking the above art scenarios I can see how pressing and cleaning could be defined as conservation because the process does not add anything to the book.

 

Where I have concerns is the proof that pressing doesn't damage the book in any way and why take a risk pressing books that are already high grade. Conservation gives the image of protecting something, whereas pressing HG is all about money. In the art world if you are seen to be a conservationist then it is something to be proud of. Why do so called comic consevationsists want to keep it hidden. Is it because their actions aren't so altruistic?

[shadroch]

In the real "art" world,suppose I were to find an unknown Picasso,that had been exposed to the elements for quite some time.If I took it to an art restorer,and had it fixed,how would this effect the value?

[Thegoldenage]

Mark,

 

Has it occurred to you yet that this topic might be gettin' old?

[weirdling-migration]

In the real "art" world,suppose I were to find an unknown Picasso,that had been exposed to the elements for quite some time.If I took it to an art restorer,and had it fixed,how would this effect the value?

 

I would think not at all. But it's apples and oranges really. If there were only one existing Action #1 would you pass it up because of restoration? If you had a choice between two Picasso lithographs, one restored and one not, which would be worth more to you?

[uclapeterg]

Here's my question for Matt Nelson:

 

Matt, is my AF#15 in the mail yet?

 

He still has it?

[buttock]

Here's my question(s) to everyone.

 

Why is it necessary to categorize all modifications into only 2 categories? Is conservation/restoration a continuum or discrete classes? Is it possible to clearly deliniate between the two (e.g. is blowing dust off a book cleaning? What amount of dust/dirt removal constitutes professional cleaning?) If not, is there any point in continuing the discussion in the direction it's going?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Mark,

 

Has it occurred to you yet that this topic might be gettin' old?

 

And it'll keep getting older until answers are forthcoming from a number of parties embroiled in the issue.

[Thegoldenage]

Thank you for answering for him. I forgot about the several foot soldiers of his on these boards.