Sawyer Rebind Revisited

Back in December, Matt Morales shared the results of one of his rebinding projects with us -- a wide-margin ESV cut down and rebound by Paul Sawyer. Not long ago, Matt sent me the Bible and asked for a second opinion. I snapped these photos and would like to share them along with some observations that might help others looking to undertake a similar project. (You can click on each image to see a larger version at Flickr.)

The photo above illustrates the best and worst of this rebinding project all at once. The best? That magnificent Nigerian goatskin cover, with its beautiful deep brown finish and attractive grain. The worst? The stiffness of the binding, which is exacerbated by the cover's thickness. Instead of wrapping around the text block like a shell -- one of the trademarks of semi- and full-yapp cover edges, this one projects stiffly at a roughly 45 degree angle, no matter which side is uppermost.

Above, another angle on the projecting cover.

The image above might give some insight into the reason the spine is so thick. As you can see, it doesn't open flat. Instead, for the first quarter-inch or so, the text block holds together, a near-solid unit, before cascading out. My little Compact ESV from LeatherBibles.com did the same thing. I believe the reason is the way the binding -- originally glued -- was sewn. It seems that instead of sewing the signatures individually, the needle was passed side-to-side through them all. As a result, the stitching prevents them from opening completely. The reason the sewing is done this way, I suspect, is that the original adhesive binding sliced the joins of each signature away, so that every page is flat against the spine for gluing. Look closely at the picture and you'll have a hard time identifying individual signatures. Instead, the pages seem to dead-end into the spine.

Another view (above) with the ribbon moved so you can see the way the spine holds together. As a result, when the Bible is opened flat on a table, it has a tendency to see-saw a bit from one side to the other.

When I open the Bible with the spine supported, the sides extend roughly parallel instead of plunging down on either side. The impression is one of stiffness, not limpness. If the goatskin cover were thinner, like the ones from Allan's or Cambridge, you'd see more flexibility, though the spine is the real drawback. Over time, I could see the thick cover growing more supple with use, but the spine doesn't seem to open up. Perhaps it will, but I'm doubtful.

Instead of a leather lining, this one uses watered silk. The effect is quite elegant, and the deep burgundy silk goes nicely with the brown cover. Unfortunately, the silk seems to fray easily, so that little threads are visible all along the edge. (You may have to click the image and view it at the original size to make them out.)

Again, you can see the frayed edges. The effect of the silk, though, is unique. I'd prefer a leather-lining, since the silk seems more compatible with a hardback than what's supposed to be a limp binding. But to each his own.

Instead of gilded edges, the pages have an attractive brown treatment I really like. The look is similar to art-gilt but entirely non-reflective. It also has a "grain" of its own, as you can see when the pages are fanned out.

My overall impression? The project is impressive, but there's room for improvement. The color scheme is magnificent: the brown goat, the brown page edges, the deep burgundy silk linking, the beautiful copper-brown ribbons. In person, it's elegant without being flashy. Understated. Where the project disappoints is the feel. The way the spine is sewn prevents easy opening. This is why, whenever possible, it's imperative to start with a sewn binding. For example, if you're one of the people thinking of rebinding a Personal Reference ESV, springing for the genuine leather edition with the sewn binding will ensure that the signatures are still intact when it comes time to re-sewn them.

If you ask me, getting the binding right would "solve" the rest of the project's problems. The thickness of the goatskin is a drawback, but not everyone prefers a super-limp cover. With time and use, this one might age magnificently, growing just supple enough to please someone who prefers a little more stiffness in his leather cover. For my taste, though, the leather needs to be thinner and the the cover should be leather-lined, as well.

The workmanship seems to have more "polish" than what I've seen from some other rebinders -- not as clean as an Allan's binding, but a little nicer in terms of fit and finish than what I've seen (for example) from Mechling. Of course, there's a price difference to consider, too.

Hopefully these photos will let you make up your own mind. Matt has received lots of questions about this project, and I'm sure he'd be happy to answer any posed here.

Comments

[Brian in Fresno]

It is a real shame this project didn't turn out better. I'm a little surprised the with the reputation Paul Sawyer seems to have that he let this one go. I would have thought the cover not laying flat would have been a dead giveaway.

[Michael Swoveland]

Now that I have had my Sawyer rebind for a month or so, I'll offer a few comments on Matt's along with impressions on mine a month on:

1. I am still in awe of the Nigerian goatskin, it looks great and the feel is just amazing. I would not consider a rebind in any other leather. Mine has a very fine grain to it, Matt's seems to have a bit more coarse grain (that is a little more pleasing to my eye). Sawyer seems to use thicker boards under the leather, while the leather itself is very supple, the boards have something of a springy quality that makes the covers a little more stiff. That said, I read mine (almost) every day and it has grown more flexible during this first month. It looks like Matt has a smaller Bible than mine and I am sure that makes quite a difference as well.

2. From looking at the photos above of Matt's Bible open, his spine looks very tight. If it started as a glued spine that was sewn at Sawyer's that could explain the problem. Paul mentioned that mine was already sewn into very small autographs, so he did not need to do anything in that respect. I notice an unusual bend in Matt's spine that suggests to me that it is sewn very tight, my guess it that is what makes his covers stick up when the Bible is closed.

3. I love the look and feel of the silk endpapers, but have noticed that the silk does fray ever so slightly and you get very fine threads at the edge.

Overall I am very pleased with mine, if I had it to do over again there are only one or two minor points I would change. I do not believe I could have achieved just the look I was after from anyone other than Paul Sawyer However, when you opt for the rich feel of this thick goatskin you do give up some flexibility. This is not as much an issue with a larger Bible like mine, but I can see where a small Bible might be too stiff. I think Mark's point about starting with a sewn binding is critical, the smaller the autographs the better.

My advice: If you are going for a specific look, which in my case was an antique, hand bound Bible, consider using Paul Sawyer. If on the other hand you care more about having a super-flexible cover, you might want to look at other binders or at the very least talk with Paul about flexibility in advance.

[Bob Burns]

What was it about the original genuine leather binding on the ESV Wide-margin Bible you did not like in the first place that made you opt for a rebind? I've not read a thoroughging review of the ESV wide-margin that touches on those issues.

Bob Burns
San Francisco

[Mark (the other one)]

The reward of a nicely done rebinding job must be deeply satisfying. At the same time, the risk looks high, even with binderies that have a top notch reputation.

Thanks to the courageous among us who make this a great site from which to learn.

[shaun]

The reason this "rebind" did not go well is because you can't churn excellence from something that's not bound well in the first place. When books have glue "paperback" type bindings there are no joins, cut off or otherwise. There are no signatures in glue bound books. It's one page stacked on top of another until the book is done and then glued. The pages are measured, printed and cut to be glued. In order for a book to have signatures (i.e. several sheets of paper folded and sewn in the middle) the printer has to print the pages in such a way as to make this possible. In other words "glued binding" printing is sort of like your printer at home. It's a one page at a time sort of thing on a much larger scale. Thus when sewing a glued binding it will inevitably wind up tight because it was never designed to be sewn in the first place. That's why in my opinion it isn't, and never will be, worth the money to rebind a glue bound book. Look at the top of the bible you're thinking about purchasing. Does it have a straight line or something that looks like tiny hills? You may have to pull the headband back a little to tell. The straight line is glued. The "hills" are sewn and this is the type that can be and is worth being rebound to your particular likings. All of this is one reason I get a wee bit ticked at publishers who charge 60 or 70 dollars for bibles that are basically glorified paperbacks (not to mention printing issues). For that amount of money there should be no reason for a bible not to be sewn. Thanks and I hope this helps.

[matt]

Bob- the reason I opted for the rebind was because the genuine leather was cardboard like and would not aways lay down flat. The ESV wide margin rebind I did with mechling turned out great and was a world apart from the genuine leather.

Shaun- I understand what you are saying...I agree. Although eventhough this rebinding turned out tight, the rebinding I did with mechling using the say edition turned out great and is VERY flexible. That is why I figured it was something with the actual rebinding. The bible was more flexible before I sent it off to Sawyer.

[patrick thatcher]

where I can buy some cowhide leather covers that will slip over new bonded leather or hardback bibles and look almost as a leather bond bible...maybe 100 patrickt777@hotmail.com