Almost Done: Mobilizing the Past and the Stack Test

I have something like 12 changes to make to the Digital Press at the University of North Dakota’s next book, Mobilizing the Past, before it can go live in both digital and paper formats.

Most of these changes involve little cosmetic fixes within the book and the addition of the book’s freshly minted LCCN (2016917316 for those of you keeping track at home!).

IMG 5515

The most important test though for a book, is the shelf or stack test. This involves how does the book look when set on a shelf or put into a stack. The logic here is that even the most battered copy of James Joyce’s Ulysses spends of its life in a stack or on a shelf. So a good book can’t just be good, it has to look good, shelf good, and stack good too.  

Mobilizing the Past’s stack mates this week are Kate Eichborn’s brilliant Adjusted Margin: Xerography, Art, and Activism in the Late Twentieth Century (2016) from the MIT Press and my newly arrived copy of the Journal of Roman Archaeology.  

9780262033961

Books from MIT press always look great, use well-considered fonts, and have just enough edge to make you feel like your reading something published by a press associated with a university on the cutting edge. They have a house style, but it never feels forced or overwhelming. And their books are affordable. (Read this 5 minute interview with Kate Eichhorn here).

Journal of roman archaeology

 The Journal of Roman Archaeology can only be described as aggressively anti-design. The cover only the smallest glimpses of what the reader should expect when he or she opens one of the two annual volumes. The text runs virtually from margin to margin on glossy paper and crowds inline images. The line spacing is dense and the font is some undistinguished member of Times family. This kind of design is not conservative or traditional, but assertively dull. 

The content, on the other hand, is so good, well-edited, and relevant that even a lapsed Roman archaeologist like myself looks forward the annual arrival of the JRA as the start of fall thinking season. So for all it’s design infelicities, the Journal of Roman Archaeology is indispensable.

My hope with volumes from the Digital Press is to make them both valuable and attractive, but I know that attractive books have more fun.

One Comment

  1. “The Journal of Roman Archaeology can only be described as aggressively anti-design.” and may I add as a former archaeology librarian: instantly disintegrating, contrary to the well-produced JRA supplementary series.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s