Bible Design and Binding

Oxford NRSV Notetaker's Bible (Deluxe Cloth)

Know what would make an awesome single-column NRSV? At the risk of killing the suspense, I'll tell you. Start with Oxford's single-column, hardback Notetaker's Bible, lop off the wide margins, and give what's left the Poor Man's Geneva Bible treatment. Or, you could leave it like it is and enjoy a pretty awesome wide margin hardback which, unlike so many hardbacks on the market, is actually made like a quality book. Here it is:

 

I know, I know. It's a hardcover. And people think I don't approve of anything but goatskin. But that's far from the case. If you read through the archive of posts here, you'll see that I've been a fan of hardcover Bibles for a long while. The problem is, many of the options out there don't live up to their potential. They're glued instead of bound. The boards have tacky artwork printed right on them. They don't open flat. The paper is terrible. Sometimes, having said I like the idea of a hardcover edition, I've found myself in the awkward position of not being able to recommend one.

A QUALITY HARDCOVER
Happily, that's not the case here. Not even close. The text setting is elegant and well-proportioned and the book is nicely produced. So many books these days look like they were made by people who hate books. This one gives the opposite impression. According to the packaging it was made in Korea and uses "thicker paper that prevents tearing and bleed through." And guess what? "Its open margins are perfect for your open mind"!

 

This is a paragraphed, text-only edition that just happens to have wide, ruled margins in the Journaling Bible vein. It comes with a single ribbon. As the packaging suggests, the paper is nice and white, though you can see some "ghosting" -- i.e., the print impression from the reverse of the page shows through. Actually, this is a good example of why I prefer a term like ghosting for that phenomenon, rather than "bleed through," which really refers to whether ink applied to the page (when you write, for example) bleeds through the paper. Oxford isn't claiming the paper is opaque; they're claiming that with "a pen designed for writing in Bibles" you shouldn't experience bleed through. 

 

Above: No concordance, no maps, just a couple of blank pages at the end.

Below: Nice endpapers, too.

 

On Translation

My FAQ explains why I don't get into debates about translation:

Q. What's your favorite edition of the Bible? What's your favorite translation?

My favorite is the one I daydream about in my head. If I could name a perfect edition, I'd probably spend all my time writing about that one. Since I can't, I write about everything. But it's no secret I'm partial to the good stuff -- high end Bibles from R. L. Allan's and Cambridge, for example. I like goatskin covers a lot.

When it comes to translations, I subscribe to St. Augustine's advice. He said the way to understand the Bible if you don't read the original languages is to compare translations. Some people lament the proliferation of translations in English these days, but I see it as a blessing. As a practical matter, I typically refer to the English Standard Version when writing and teaching. I like the fact that it's on the literal side and appreciate its location in the Authorized Version tradition. Still, no translation is perfect, so I make use of both literal and dynamic versions, everything from the NRSV to the REB, the NASB to the NLT. I've even been known to dip into The Message.

Since the purpose of the Bible Design & Binding Blog is design and binding, I don't get into translation debates here. If you're interested in discussing translation issues, there are many great places to do it where the writers are much better equipped than I am to enlighten.

Then the Mother-of-All-Off-Topic-Threads comes along, and I feel the need to explain at length. By creating this post and leaving comments open, I'm also providing a venue for anyone who feels the need to talk about translation issues. I'd appreciate it if you'd confine such discussions to the comments here.

Confessions of a Shill

Last week's "Mother of All Off Topic Threads" has generated some interesting points, and I plan to address two of them. Let's start with the question of "shilling." Chuck Martin raised a concern I think is worth taking up, so I'll quote him and then reply:

I am slightly worried that Mark may be tempted to shill for some of the publishers, particularly R.L. Allen. I've noticed a large number of reviews for R.L. Allen and Cambridge products, and it appears that Mark is receiving not just one advance copy but entire sets from R.L. Allen. Yes, I do see that Mark has reviewed some products from other publishers. No, I don't believe it is inappropriate for a reviewer to receive one advance copy of a product. Yes, I understand that R.L. Allen and Cambridge are two of the highest quality houses. And no, I'm not sending Mark any supporting funds while I access his site for free. I'd just like to see a little more diversity if it is feasable.

THE OFT-FORGOTTEN FAQ

First, let me thank Chuck for raising the question. I appreciate the frankness. To reply, let me reiterate a point made in the Frequently Asked Questions, which I suspect many readers haven't noticed. Here, I explain where the Bibles I review come from:

Q. Where do the Bibles you review come from?

These days, I'm able to request review copies from some publishers, which allows me to cover a lot more ground than I could relying only on my budget. (My wife is grateful.) When I can't get review copies, I go to the piggy bank and see what I find.

By the way, if you're a publisher and you'd like to talk about review copies, check out the Publishers page.

Q. How do you choose which Bibles to review?

I'm drawn to editions that demonstrate quality production and innovative design. By "quality" I mean what some people mistakenly label luxury: sewn bindings, limp covers, good paper. There's no science to the selection process, only passion. I give priority to Bibles I think my audience will appreciate, and those I think the publishing community can learn from. I don't review everything that's suggested to me -- but I'm happy to receive the suggestions.

R. L. Allan Personal Size Reference ESV in Black, Brown & Red Goatskin

Nineteen months ago, I posted a very thorough review of the then-new Personal Size Reference ESV from Crossway. I liked it a lot, but still had a couple of reservations. For one thing, the 7.4 point type was pretty small, with a column width that stretched a bit too far. On top of that, the only binding options were a sewn genuine leather cover and a glued TruTone. (Later, that changed, as Crossway offered sewn bindings with the TruTone covers.) The review ended with a "wait and see" reflection:

I love the Personal Reference ESV, but I understand if not everyone does. For me it delivers most of the goods -- a readable, single-column setting with a clever approach to references and a relatively compact form factor. I’ve never enjoyed reading the poetry of the ESV more, and it’s never looked so good on the page before. All in all, I’m satisfied. Having said that, what I’m waiting on is a quality binding for the Personal Reference. It’s hard to commit fully until then.

At long last, the day has come. R. L. Allan is offering the Crossway-printed, sewn PSR text blocks bound in your choice of three leathers: black highland goatskin, brown highland goatskin, and a red goatskin Allan's has dubbed "Alhambra." Each comes with three ribbons, art-gilt (red under gold) page edges, and a semi-yapp cover. 

Highland goatskin is a naturally grained skin that offers unparalleled flexibility. Some covers, like the black one reviewed here, feature a pronounced grain, while others, like the brown shown here, are smoother. This variation comes with the territory. Alhambra goatskin appears to have a printed grain (like the buffalo grained ESV3), so it has a firmer feel in the hand, but this is coupled with an impressive limpness, as we'll see.

 

The Personal Size Reference ESV is a single-column text setting with cross references on the inside margin. If you can hack the small type, the formatting aids reading quite a bit. While a two-column paragraphed text is just fine, the width of the columns tends to force awkward line breaks wherever you encounter poetry. One of the advantages of a single-column setting is that the poetry has room to breath. 

 

Of course, there are trade-offs. The reason two-column settings are ubiquitous is that they fit more words into the same space. The PSR features type roughly comparable in size to Cambridge's Pitt Minion, only it's quite a bit thicker. We'll do a proper comparison in a moment, but for now it's helpful to think of the PSR on a spectrum with the smaller Pitt Minion at one end and the larger Allan's ESV1 (which is essentially a rebound Classic Reference ESV) at the other. The PSR sits right in the middle. Not as ultra-portable as the Pitt Minion, but handier than the ESV1. To me the size (7.25" x 5" x 1.25") seems perfect for carry. It fills the hand in a way the Pitt Minion doesn't, but without the extra size of the ESV1. 

 

For some time now, I've used the PSR as my daily reader. Is the type small? Sure. But I don't notice much anymore. What I do notice is the reading "drag" when I switch back to a two-column setting. The reading plan I follow is the same as the one found in the Daily Reading Bible. I removed the perforated schedule from that edition, and now it keep it with whatever Bible I'm reading through. Since there are readings from the Old Testament, the Psalms, and the New Testament, you need three markers to keep up with where you're at. Like the ESV1, the R. L. Allan PSR comes with three, which makes things easy.

 

Style-wise, the Allan's PSR takes its cues from the most recent editions of the ESV1. On the outside the chocolate brown and black editions look like ESV1s that were shrunk in the wash. The ones pictured here are advance copies, so I should note two dissimilarities. First, the ribbons here are the usual thin variety you see on most Bibles. The actual ribbons these PSRs will ship width are twice the width. [UPDATE: This turned out not to be the case. The review copies pictured here have 5mm wide ribbons, while the production copies have 7mm ribbons. Not double the width, but an increase of about 40%.] Secondly, the semi-yapp covers here do not wrap around the text block at all, instead projecting straight out. Typically my Allan's Bibles arrive wrapped in paper which has the effect of reinforcing that curve. These didn't. I don't know what the production editions will look like, but suffice it to say, if your edges project like this at first, they'll begin to curve with use. My ESV Pitt Minion is doing the same, though its cover doesn't project as much.