Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper” as Want to Read:
Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper

3.37 of 5 stars 3.37  ·  rating details  ·  736 ratings  ·  84 reviews
The ostensible purpose of a library is to preserve the printed word. But for fifty years our country’s libraries–including the Library of Congress–have been doing just the opposite, destroying hundreds of thousands of historic newspapers and replacing them with microfilm copies that are difficult to read, lack all the color and quality of the original paper and illustratio ...more
Paperback, 370 pages
Published April 9th 2002 by Vintage (first published 2001)
more details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Double Fold, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Double Fold

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,536)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  rating details
Nicholson Baker’s Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper is a fiery polemic dedicated to the task of protecting what he sees as one of our nation’s most important resources: our libraries’ massive stockpile of seldom-used older books and newspapers. As Baker explains, the extent of our paper reserves of old newspapers and rarely read old books is dwindling, often being chopped up and “preserved” (that is, their content, rather than their form, is preserved) in either microform or a digi ...more
Feb 21, 2007 Lucy rated it 1 of 5 stars
Recommends it for: NOBODY
DON'T LISTEN TO HIM! Nicholson Baker is NOT a librarian or archivist; he does not understand the missions of these institutions. His argument, therefore, is uninformed and inherently romanticizes the concept of preservation. He is, in short, a nutcase willing to spend his life savings on a crumbling anti-legacy. For a scholarly response (from an eminent archives scholar), look to Richard Cox's Vandals in the Stacks?: A Response to Nicholson Baker's Assualt on Libraries.
It took me a ridiculously long time to finish this book, for reasons into which I shall not go, but that is no reflection on the book itself. It is about the decimation of our libraries by fiendish proponents of microfilm. Untold treasures of periodicals and books have been lost due to the persuasion of librarians by "preservationists" that the paper would soon crumble into dust. One test that would be done to prove the incipient crumbliness of a page was called the "Double Fold" test. Nicholson ...more
A. Jesse
Unbelievably stupid.

In his first (and as far as I know his best) book The Mezzanine, Nicholson Baker displays a charming affection for the antique, the mechanical, the ingenious. But in Double Fold this charming affection is stripped away, revealing an impractical Ludditism. Baker argues that libraries shouldn't throw away card catalogs once they've been replaced with online databases, and instead they should preserve these hulking and impractical monstrosities for the subtle data they contain:
The elegance and irreverence Nicholson Baker usually brings to his fiction work (especially the sublime vignette "The Mezzanine") is completely absent in "Double Fold", Baker's screed about the replacement of library books with microfiche and other digital storage. While the author's quest -- to rally for the preservation of rare and old tomes -- seems noble enough, his methods are more in line with conservative news reporting. Whenever he interviews someone who shares his viewpoints, they are d ...more
Michael Fitzgerald
A fascinating book, but incredibly biased. Needs to be balanced with Vandals in the Stacks by Richard Cox.
This is Nicholson Baker's obsessive treatise on the "assault on paper". I am somewhat sympathetic to his cause where he describes how libraries in the name of "preservation" and/or "creating space" have replaced rare newspaper collections with subpar technologies. In doing so, we have lost information that isn't being captured by microfilm, microfiche, and other technologies. These early technologies led to the destruction of irreplaceable collections. He instead advocates the preservation of pa ...more
Jenny (Reading Envy)
"The library has gone astray partly because we trusted the librarians so completely."

Nicholson Baker has written a heavily researched retelling of when the first digitization (microfilming) movement hit the major libraries in the United States, leading many to dump the only originals of major newspapers, journals, and books. He zeroes in on the Library of Congress and other government agencies (CIA, NASA, and the NEH) who have had major roles to play in the destruction of print.

While I found s
Alex Telander
Attention college students: a great crime is being committed and right under our noses! It is no longer possible to enter reputed libraries like the San Francisco or New York Public Library, and call up a wonderfully preserved copy of say The New York World from 1912, because said issue no longer exists in its original form. All that remains is a badly lit photograph of each page on low-resolution microfilm. And what did the library do with the original copy they once possessed? Why, they threw ...more
I probably read 80% of this book. For the first two hundred pages, I enjoyed Baker's crusade against microfilm, his horror at the destruction of collections of primary sources (particularly newspaper collections); I even laughed when another reviewed charged him with "hoarding." No, I would counter. He's not a hoarder. He understands that there is something about having access to the original documents when trying to understand a period of history that is more instructive than surveying a few ar ...more
Baker has some serious hoarding issues. The premise of the book is that libraries are throwing away tons of old newspapers and books and we're supposed to feel bad about it. He even mixes in some conspiracy theory to connect this practice to the military. Overall I just didn't buy any of it. Really all it did was make me wonder how Baker's wife could stand living with him, since he blew all of their savings to buy a bunch of old newspapers, and spent his free time bending the pages in all of the ...more
His non-fiction is just as top quality as his wonderful novels.

Reading notes:
12...formed the non-profit Am News Repository (since taken over by Duke U)
14..the Yellow Kid cartoon begat "yellow journalism"
micro-madman Herman Fussler
15..US Newspaper Program..govt project ..catalog as many US papers as possible
17..OSU..Lucy Caswell...Cartoon Research librarian...Bill Blackbeard collection (SF)
19..Historic Newspapers Archives, Inc...birthday keepsake.. $40/issue
25..destroying to preserve
39..reading t
Elaina Vitale
Nov 27, 2007 Elaina Vitale rated it 3 of 5 stars
Recommends it for: people who aren't swayed by nice writing
Baker has some good points but largely knows absolutely nothing about libraries, preservation and microfilming.
I have been a fan of Nicholson Baker since reading "The Mezzanine." This book talks about public libraries and the way that old books and newspapers are handled. Baker is of the belief that all books and newpapers need to be saved- at least at the Library of Congress, and has been outraged to find libraries simply destroying books and papers that have been weeded. He is a tad idealistic, but I can definitely see where he is coming from. Even if things are saved digitally and to microfiche, the q ...more
I get what he's saying, but I'm still not sure if I agree. Yes, there is value in saving the stuff of daily life. But I'm not convinced that libraries in general are obliged to try and keep everything. Yes, when you convert from one medium to another, you lose something (maybe an awful lot if you choose a dead-end medium like say Betamax). But paper isn't always the answer.

It's going to become an even greater question this century, I suppose: what do we keep, and how do we keep it? And how do we
Equal parts elegy and screed, Double Fold mourns the disappearance of paper and the ascendancy of microfilmic and digital mediums in contemporary libraries. Although that makes it sound like a total yawn, Baker, the author of that phone sex classic (?) Vox, manages to make Double Fold an absolutely absorbing page-turner. This is due in part to the outraged first-person narration through which Baker communicates his personal fury at the space-saving measures undertaken by libraries and especially ...more
Audra Deemer
Nicholson Baker feels strongly about the importance of libraries as depositories of information. They are to hold for us now and future generations of information-seekers the original, physical texts of newspapers and books regardless of their current or past popularity. What may not be popular today may be tomorrow and if the original is gone, we may be left with an unreadable copy in the form of illegible or deteriorated Microfilm or even an obsolete digital form. Double Fold is a critical and ...more
Baker basically makes his point in the first chapter. Libraries across the country are putting all of their newspapers onto micro-film and discarding the originals. Microfilm and its cousins are bad because they degrade easily, do not record text clearly, are incapable of capturing the color of images, cartoons and are often incomplete. Libraries would actually save money per volume if they simply rented warehouses to store materials in, instead of paying to have the newspapers photographed and ...more
I read this for my class on preservation and conservation in library school.

Nicholson Baker is a very passionate writer, but his disgust with library preservation policy is often misdirected in this rather caustic critical work. While he does have solid points, for example the problems of preserving the various editions of each newspaper and the microfilming of color illustrations, he seems to imply that these weren't issues of concern in the library world before he brought them up. However, Dou
This book is terribly outdated and Baker is insufferable. He is rude about other people's views and I feel like he never shuts up. He focuses on the most absurd tangents that have nothing to do with book preservation. This book is far too long for a man who's only solution to everything is to buy a building and put shelves in it. That's not how things work buddy.
Redundant at points. Originally started as a magazine article, and perhaps should have stayed as such. But perhaps by fleshing out into a book, brought more press and attention to this situation.

N.B., published in 2001, makes me wonder how much has changed, if anything, since then.
Kit Kincade
This book is a must for anyone who is interested in books, book history, librarianship,or any sort of historic conservation. Meticulously researched and argued. I can't recommend this highly enough.
read this book during my nicholson baker phase. which came right on the heels of my john updike phase. in hindsight i only liked bakers non-fiction works, this, a tirade against microfiche which i thoroughly support and his literary stalking of updike in u&i. i kept trying to read his micro-detailed fiction like the mezzanine (ie, what i think about while tying my shoelaces during a lunch break) thinking it must be genius till i gave up thinking i dont give a shit about genius if its this fu ...more
Sep 03, 2011 Lauren added it
Shelves: grad-school
I think Baker suffers from the same disease that the people who are (vilified and exploited) on the television show "Hoarders" do - irrational refusal to dispose of anything that is now useless. It's darling but also sad and overwhelming. Where does he think we're going to keep all these books that don't even have a legitimate research use? Better yet, WHY?

His other tragic flaw is that he argues more on emotion than logical argument, despite supplanting the book with numerous anecdotes and fact
I got to page 50 and just couldn't take it anymore. The whole point of the book is that the author is pissed off at the destruction of physical newspapers in favor of microfilm - this is made clear on the inside of the dust jacket. My problem with the book is that the author keeps saying the same thing in slightly different ways. He gives new facts, lays bare outrageous actions and irresponsibilities on the part of librarians - things that should keep me hooked - but everything is just a variati ...more
The sort of book that makes one feel like an expert on a very specific topic, a topic which they may never have encountered before. Not only do I feel like an expert on destructive library "preservation" tactics, I feel like quite a passionate expert. Mr. Baker is, of course, exactly right about everything, and his opponents should be ashamed. He is also an enormously talented writer--one of my favorites. Who else had a chance in hell of making this book interesting?

This book has been one more
Grey Wolf
This was an excellent tour-de-force and an eye-opening warning about the destruction of heritage. The idea that the Library of Congress and the major US university libraries do not have anywhere between them the majority of American newspapers in original form - ie a newspaper! They microfilmed them, and then either sold them or binned them! Hundreds of thousands of books went this way too. And in addition, the idea that the LoC is the repository of one of each copy of every book in the country ...more
Baker has a bone to pick with libraries and librarians. Complete series of newspapers dating back through the decades are being mutilated in order to digitize the content. He is enraged. He contends that the papers should be preserved, as printed, because the texture, quality of illustrations and the romance of paper itself is lost through digitization. And, he says, newsprint paper is not as fragile and prone to deterioration as we are all led to believe. He has spent time, money and energy to ...more
What. A. Whackjob. For serious, guys.
I only made it a quarter of the way through this book before I had to bring it back to the library. I have been really excited to read this book ever since it came out. I was greatly disappointed once I started reading it, however. Barker just couldn't keep my interest. In the intro to the book, he says he started this as an article rather than a book, and I really think he should have kept it as an article. There just wasn't enough substance to his argument.
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 51 52 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • Library: An Unquiet History
  • A Splendor of Letters: The Permanence of Books in an Impermanent World
  • Libraries in the Ancient World
  • The Case for Books: Past, Present, and Future
  • Reference and Information Services in the 21st Century : An Introduction
  • ABC for Book Collectors
  • Revolting Librarians Redux: Radical Librarians Speak Out
  • The Smithsonian Book of Books
  • The Portable MLIS: Insights from the Experts
  • Glut: Mastering Information Through the Ages
  • The Library: An Illustrated History
  • The Book on the Bookshelf
  • Casanova Was a Librarian: A Light-Hearted Look at the Profession
  • The Book in the Renaissance
  • Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management, 2/e
  • A Universal History of the Destruction of Books: From Ancient Sumer to Modern-Day Iraq
  • In the Stacks: Short Stories about Libraries and Librarians
  • The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe
Nicholson Baker is a contemporary American writer of fiction and non-fiction. As a novelist, his writings focus on minute inspection of his characters' and narrators' stream of consciousness. His unconventional novels deal with topics such as voyeurism and planned assassination, and they generally de-emphasize narrative in favor of intense character work. Baker's enthusiasts appreciate his ability ...more
More about Nicholson Baker...
The Mezzanine Vox The Anthologist The Fermata House of Holes

Share This Book

“In 1855, as the price of paper rose, Dr. Deck proposed to dig up 2 1/2 million tons of Egyptian mummies, ship them to New York, unroll them; and use their linen wrappings to make paper.” 2 likes
More quotes…