I thought the final note “which can irritate modern day readers” in the heading was a funny comment. Were historic readers immune to the effects? Has a binder deteriorated such that the irritants come off more readily? Likely neither and it’s always been a problem, but it’s an unanswered question.
Probably has always been a largely occupational hazard and otherwise of little concern to the general public, even those who read books regularly. Of course in this era where fear sells and everything has to be harmless regardless of real risk, it's become a more prominent issue.
I don't think this is a "fear sells" issue. Arsenic green is remarkably toxic. In the 19th century, the toxicity just wasn't known or recognized as serious. Now, we know better. Medical diagrams from the time period show hand injuries on people who worked with arsenic compounds regularly (deep sores that won't heal, e.g.)
My first thought was that they referred to metaphorically poisonous books, something that scans the catalogue looking nasty books about diversity or gender ... "oh no, more book banning".
LOL exactly. If I had a choice between a book burning of these arsenic books, or a book burning of stunning and brave books such as Middlesex, I would absolutely sniff those arsenic fumes, as that would smell better than to silence the speech of the oppressed classes by the oppressors
Clarification of the ambiguous title :
The tool was developed by University of St Andrews, not the poisonous books.
Haha that’s exactly why I clicked on the story :)
This is from a sequel or a remake of The Name of the Rose?
I thought the final note “which can irritate modern day readers” in the heading was a funny comment. Were historic readers immune to the effects? Has a binder deteriorated such that the irritants come off more readily? Likely neither and it’s always been a problem, but it’s an unanswered question.
Probably has always been a largely occupational hazard and otherwise of little concern to the general public, even those who read books regularly. Of course in this era where fear sells and everything has to be harmless regardless of real risk, it's become a more prominent issue.
I don't think this is a "fear sells" issue. Arsenic green is remarkably toxic. In the 19th century, the toxicity just wasn't known or recognized as serious. Now, we know better. Medical diagrams from the time period show hand injuries on people who worked with arsenic compounds regularly (deep sores that won't heal, e.g.)
I assume one would develop tolerance to those acute symptoms from repeated exposure.
And you'd be wrong, like the victims were.
My first thought was that they referred to metaphorically poisonous books, something that scans the catalogue looking nasty books about diversity or gender ... "oh no, more book banning".
LOL exactly. If I had a choice between a book burning of these arsenic books, or a book burning of stunning and brave books such as Middlesex, I would absolutely sniff those arsenic fumes, as that would smell better than to silence the speech of the oppressed classes by the oppressors
It's funny how parody, sarcasm and hyperbolic sincerity are all absolutely impossible to distinguish between these days.
Killer books — literally. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
I knew about toxic wallpaper, but hadn’t turned the page on poisonous books. (Apologies for the pun. I’ll see myself out.)
But in all seriousness, I’m glad to see efforts like this helping to identify and prevent potential harm.
Great, first I had to buy a geiger counter for my old watch collection, now I need to worry about my old books too.
Make sure to apply the geiger counter to your old camera lenses too, some are surprisingly spicy.
I just read the first and last part and immediately alert my relative studying in St. Andrew about the danger of the books there ;-).
It is “developed by” not “in”. No Harry Potter corner not allowing students to visit. Actually they do. But every library has green cover does.
At least he can go to the exhibition I guess.