Before you get all nervous about Christine not wearing gloves: it's okay. There are many legitimate reasons why librarians don't wear white gloves: bit.ly/2gTGrc1
It's definitely more dangerous to wear gloves and lose dexterity. I know they've been having a debate on the subject at our memorial tower, when the pages of the war dead are turned once a day in a white glove ceremony..
Those of us who watch Objectivity know all about how gloves and old books don't mix. (And if you're not watching Objectivity, go subscribe now because it's full of good stuff just like in this video.) Edit: Emily, you should totally invite Brady over to the museum. I'm sure he would love a *Field* trip.
If it's wrong to become stimulated, aroused rather, by the Mary W. Runnels Rare Book Room then I don't want to be right!!! I must make visits to our, the United States', most prestigious libraries. To be surrounded by books and silence sounds so very relaxing; the next time my counselor tells me to imagine a relaxing place I'll have to visit...
Gloves can cause problems, the problem is delicate handing. You can see they are treating the books correctly, moving the fingers to the far corners, finding the page and turning gently. Very well done.
I just finished listening to the Hello Internet episode where they handle rare books/objects at the Royal Society-and now this is uploaded-during my shift digitizing antique literary magazines at my college library ^^
Brain Scoop + rare books!?! Perfect combination. My first day on the job in my first Special Collections job was as a page turner for a double elephant folio copy of Audubon's Birds of America. The "Q's" (in LC call numbers) are my favorite section in special collections because so many scientific books, especially in the 19th century were hand-colored. Shout out to all of the un-named 19th century women who helped make scientific books as accurate as possible with their painting. Thank you so much for the peek inside the rare book room!
You are very lucky. I've only ever seen reproductions (I have one on my bookshelf 3m in front of me now) and I've certainly never been lucky enough to touch a copy.
dlbstl I did lots of things in that job! I was assigned to a patron who wanted to look at the book to sit with them and turn the pages. Using two people to turn a page because it is so large and our hands are so tiny, can be a great way to support the book for page turns. A page needs to be supported in more than one spot to turn it safely.
Joshua Rosen There are several libraries and museums around the country that have copies, and allow public access. This is a dream you can make a reality.
An interesting thing about those Audubon illustrations is that when he got to larger birds, for example Flamingos, they didn't fit even on those large pages. So the pose he put them in has their neck in a very strange position with their head near their feet. Not a natural thing the bird would do.
Um... unless they are eating? When they basically just dangle their heads next to their feet? They do a cool side to side motion when they filter brine shrimp and minnows. Very rhythmic. They also will take up a mouth-full of mud and filter it out to get little crabs and snails. Audubon's poor understanding of perspective by even a couple of decades later artistic standards make many of his illustrations look awkward. Same can be said of most illustrator's depictions of horses and dogs at the time. I don't mean any offense at all, but honestly, dem birds spend a LOT of time in that exact posture.
@@chuxmix65 Concerning Audubon’s perspective it isn’t necessarily fair to say he had a poor understanding of perspective because he tried to illustrate the birds in a manner that the reader would be able to see the characteristics of the birds in greater detail. For example there is a picture of a flying duck in one of the volumes but the duck is in mid flight with its head turned to its side. This isn’t a case of Audubon’s poor understanding of perspective or bird flight positions. He wanted to be able to illustrate both flight mechanism and the unique bill formation of the bird’s face simultaneously even though the duck would never have flown in such a fashion. And it is understandable that some of his illustrations look awkward considering much of the source material was difficult to capture. He took sketches of the birds in their natural habitats and then shot them and then stuffed their bodies with wire to configure them, the process of doing so would result in semi realistic poses but would lead to artificial illustrations. One has to take into consideration the time period in which these books were made far before cameras and better means of capturing life like depictions also he did this on a tight budget based on the subscription system.
Can I love this channel more? I mean not only it's a brainscoop episode. It's a brainscoop books episode. No no not just any books, rare books. Thank you for giving me 8 minutes of joy!
Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body" of 1543 has incredibly detailed depictions of anatomy and absolutely stunning woodcuts. I wish I could I see an original copy!
Thanks for that it reminded me of a friend who was a librarian at the Wellington Museum NZ he used to tell me about the days when he got to access the hand written journals of captain cook & stuff! In my next life I want to be a librarian in a rare book room!
It's so great! For instance if you want to check out that fish book from the 1554, here it is! www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/156187#page/137/mode/1up
So cool. The U of Minnesota Twin Cities campus used to have some prints and Audubon's copper plates on display. The Field Museum is very lucky to have the complete set of elephant folios. Thanks for sharing!
I’ve been listening to a bunch of radiolab podcasts and I heard the one today that you were in! I think it’s from like 2013, but I was so excited! I was like, wait, I watch her youtube channel!!
The word "natural history" actually has a fascinating history itself, from the ancients all the way to the 19th century. It doesn't have anything to do with what we now consider 'history', obviously. Nowadays, 'history' means the study of bygone times, but obviously natural history does not just study the past! 'History' used to mean something much broader, roughly equivalent to what we may now call a 'study' or an 'enquiry' into something; a history of fishes is really just a study of fishes, and natural history is really just the study of nature. The early royal society, leaning heavily on the Baconian tradition of producing 'histories', was an institute dedicated to producing histories. A video clarifying the development of the concept of 'history' might be a cool thing to do! You'd probably have to find a good historian of science / historian of ideas, or maybe even a philologist; I'm a historian of ideas myself and from experience I know that very few people (even experts) have a good grasp of the concept of 'history' and its development over time.
Arrived here from "No Dumb Questions". Subscribed immediately. Emily, you're the most friendly and entertaining RU-vid personalities I've seen. I can't wait to watch more of your work.
Ooo, ooo, can you show us some of the misclassifications that were made in the rare books? It'll help junior scientists come to terms with the fact mistakes happen and the field keeps growing.
Oh I like those drawings! Amazing detail to anatomy and color, just like real birds. The idea of making a life-sized book of the birds of America is pretty cool. It's giving you a better feeling for their size which is hard to get from looking at tiny photographs.
I am so glad that the digital version is being available. Although I would love to see these books in person, I can imagine that keeping them safe and preserved from general public is highly important. :)
The day this was published I had purchased an awesome book Natural Histories - Extraordinary Rare Book Selections from the American Museum of Natural History Library I love it so much! 💜
Don't know whether you are still making videos, but if so... The last few times I visited the museum with my wife and son, I was not physically capable of our usual walk-around, so I sat in one of your listening rooms reading books from the library and listening to ethnographic/anthropology tapes. I think that others with mobility issues might be interested in learning about this an other alternative experiences at the museum.
Holy cow, the "Investigations and Studies in Jade" images are blowing my mind. 1906?? They looks like they were takin with modern day technology? The shadows cast by the pieces really brings them to life. Beautiful work right there.
The Audubon bird illustrated are absolutely lovely. You are also very lucky in the US to have such a tremendously varied flora and fauna compared to the UK.
First! It is great that you shout out to the Biodiversity Heritage Library: This collective work is amazing. Check out their Twitter and Instagram: their posts make my day everytime !
This video kind of reminds me of my childhood. It was mostly in nicotine stained houses / hotel function rooms / church halls full of old guys but the books look the same. Probably not as rare though.
It's kind of surreal as an Australian to see a book of "The Birds of Australia" in a rare book room across the ocean in a museum on the other side of the world! 🇦🇺
I was wrong about the date- it's from 1919 - but still, a fascinating read: "Fresh-water mussels and mussel industries of the United States," by R. E. Coker www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/43678#/summary
OK just got done watching SciShow Quiz Show from today, and they talked about whale earwax plugs. Does the Chicago Field Museum have any whale earwax plugs? Can we see them??
Coyly eliding past the fact that the Audubon book is worth ~$8M (yes, US $). Quite right: the money is immaterial to the thebrainscoop, and the Field Museum compared to the information and history it preserves.
Yet we could just archive what it says and they could sell it and contribute to the growing mentally ill homeless population due to the state closing multiple asylums and letting them go. Yeah Chicago is great.
+Dankbeast Dorian I'm not so sure that's really of much help, sure 8m is a LOT of money, trust me, I'm scraping by, I can't imagine what millions of dollars even is... But in the big picture 8m is a drop in the bucket. To really make a positive impact on the people you mention we need a fundamental change in the way we treat those people, a big change, rather, many changes, small and large to really make a difference... I agree that it's a travesty the way our society simply pushes them aside and often treats them less than human, it's not right, it's downright unamerican( as are many things that we accept) and change is needed! All you can control is yourself and your actions, you may not have 8m to contribute, but if more people (ideally everyone) do their part then the solution will be much more likely to succeed. Not everyone has time or money to contribute, that's fine, we all have the capacity to treat others with love, care and compassion, even if that just means saying hello.
Why is 1801 the cut off year? How did we arrive at that date for being the "old books" that makes a book a part of the rare book collection? When was the last time that year was updated?