Soviet literature on book design in the NEP period (1921–1928)
Propaedeutics and theory
In 1922, “Tipografsky kalendar’ na 1922 god” (Typographic calendar for the year 1922), compiled by I. D. Galaktionov, was published in Leningrad. This “calendar” appears as an old-fashioned almanac-type reference work, a format that had been common before the revolution. In terms of theoretical content, it contains only a short glossary of typographic terms occupying 13 pages. Yet, given the broad scope of the book—which includes historical and practical materials as well as addresses of relevant organizations—it may be regarded as a universal compendium that approaches the field of book design “in general”.
It is worth noting that Galaktionov included the same glossary, albeit in a slightly revised form, in the 1926 reissue of “Naborno-tipografskoe delo” (Typesetting and typographic trade), which will be discussed in the section devoted to practical manuals.
A book called “Poligraficheskoe proizvodstvo” (Polygraphic production), compiled by L. E. Kaplan, edited by N. V. Samokatov, and published in Kharkiv in 1925, belongs to the same type of universal compendium. Although the subheading on the title page states “Short encyclopedia”, this book is rather a well-constructed compilation of other books on this subject, which are listed at the end of each chapter. The chapters are devoted to the history of book printing, type and spacing material, the technique of hand and machine composition, jobbing composition, and related industries (proofreading, printing, binding). The author says in the preface, that, besides the listed sources, which were quoted or retold, he used information from “his own experience” and “foreign sources”.[1]
Throughout the second half of 1921, the Moscow journal “Pechat’ i revolyutsia” (Printing and revolution) published the treatise “The art of the book” written by critic and art historian A. A. Sidorov. This work consists of three parts, the first of which is about the harmony of typographic composition, the second is about the book cover, and the third is about the art of illustration. “The Art of the book” was published as a separate book in 1922, and it is the only prewar work on the subject to be reissued after the war, in 1979.
Another work by an art critic, “Daily art” by N. M. Tarabukin, was published in 1925. In the section devoted to book design, the author writes that a book should be designed by one specialist, which he suggested calling “montagist” [2] (i. e. “montage specialist”). It was precisely in these years that the new profession of “technical editor” emerged in the USSR, approximately corresponding to a contemporary book designer.
Although containing a number of noteworthy passages, the books by Sidorov and Tarabukin were nevertheless written by authors external to the typographic profession, which resulted in an excessive brevity or superficiality where more concrete discussion was required.
The lack of more substantial theoretical works was partially compensated for by the publication of Paul Renner’s book “Typografie als Kunst” (Typography as art), translated into Russian as “Knigopechatanie kak iskusstvo” in 1925. The collection of articles by Renner, a well-known German theorist and practitioner of typography, included aesthetic essays as well as very practical ones, such as “Typography rules”. The extended preface written by M. I. Tschelkunov was devoted to the same rules. Drawing on Renner’s text, Tschelkunov developed his own version of the rules of typographic art. A year earlier these rules had been adopted by the Commission for the study of the art of the book at Gosizdat (State Publishing House), whose members included M. I. Tschelkunov and A. A. Sidorov.[3] This document became the first notable post-revolutionary attempt to establish rules for composition and makeup.
Moreover, Tschelkunov substantially expanded the “Typographic glossary” included in Renner’s collection. In 1927, Y. S. Khomutov’s “Novy orfograficheskiy slovar’” (New orthographic dictionary) also included an appendix titled “Kratky poligrafichesky slovar’” (Short typographic dictionary). Although not independent works, the supplementary glossaries in these and other books of the period contributed to the development of typographic terminology, without which serious study of the subject would be difficult to imagine.
The books described above were published in Moscow.
In 1927, in Gutenberg Jahrbuch (Gutenberg Yearbook), one of the key German periodicals on the subject published in Mainz, El Lissitzky’s manifesto “Unser Buch (U.d.S.S.R.)” (Our book (USSR)) appeared. This article, like the theoretical works by Sidorov and Tarabukin mentioned above, should be regarded as a phenomenon parallel to the world of book design rather than directly connected with it. But whereas Sidorov’s and Tarabukin’s books offered a view shaped by the academic field, Lissitzky’s text—which belongs alongside the manifestos of artists and poets (especially the Futurists)—is unmistakably a message from the realm of pure art. Filled with revolutionary enthusiasm and calling for a radical transformation of the book’s form, it foreshadows Jan Tschichold’s “The new typography” of 1928, while remaining only loosely related to typographic practice—similar to Tschichold’s famous treatise.
Despite the fact that “Gutenberg Yearbook” was known and read in Soviet Russia, we find no evidence yet that Lissitzky’s German-language article was noticed in his homeland. It was translated and published in the USSR only after the Second World War.[4]
History
The chapter on the history of book printing, sometimes extended to the history of writing, appears in many practical manuals on book design. Since a thorough explanation of production practices rarely goes without a parallel definition of terminology, it can be said that any substantial manual on book design can be considered universal—that is, one that includes all possible theoretical, historical, and practical knowledge on the subject.
Of course, historical chapters in such publications only supplement the main practical part and are written by practitioners who, as a rule, are far from historical scholarship. Researchers of the topic still need to study these brief, dependent essays to determine which of them hold the greatest value. The value may lie not so much in the collections of facts—which are often derivative and poorly verified—but rather in the style and narrative techniques employed by the practitioners to engage similarly practical, often inexperienced readers.
In 1922, “Conversations of a typesetter” by I. D. Galaktionov was published in Petrograd. A second updated edition appeared in 1925. This book is mainly practical but also includes fairly lengthy historical notes on Johannes Gutenberg and Ivan Fyodorov. Being a practitioner rather than a scholar, I. D. Galaktionov created a “propagandistic” [5] book intended to provide typesetters with examples of outstanding personalities. Focusing on literary embellishment rather than critical selection of facts, Galaktionov produced something in between a hagiography and a historical essay. It should be noted that many biographical essays written by book designers suffer from a similar flaw.
Next, we will consider only those editions from the period entirely devoted to the history of book printing.
Also in 1922, the book “Ivan Fyodorov” by I. D. Galaktionov was published, apparently based on the author’s pre-revolutionary brochures of the same title.
In 1923, “History of the book” by literary scholar V. V. Busch was published in Petrograd. I. D. Galaktionov himself wrote a harsh review.[6] This short book contained many serious errors (mostly typos), but as a brief summary of lectures that lists the main facts and is almost free of judgment, it is much closer in form to the modern understanding of a popular historical essay than the old-fashioned “Conversations of a typesetter”.
As early as 1921, “The book and its artistic appearance (in connection with book printing in Kazan)” by P. M. Dulsky was first published in the journal “Kazansky bibliofil” (Kazan bibliophile) and later issued as a separate edition. The book briefly discusses the history of the “artistic” book in Russia and worldwide, and also covers the history of book printing in Kazan. By “artistic book”, the author means decorated or illustrated books—a perspective typical of bibliophiles.
In 1923, “The book” by professional historian N. M. Pakul was published in Kharkiv. This work was based on numerous sources, though not all periods are covered equally—most attention, for some reason, is given to the ancient period. As a history of the book itself rather than book printing, this work is even less related to the subject of book design than the other works mentioned in this section.
In 1924, a compilatory brochure titled “History of the book” was published by the Regional Typographic School of the North Caucasus in Rostov-on-Don. Most likely, its compiler was N. P. Proskurnin, the school’s director and author of other books published there. An analogous brochure by L. E. Kaplan was published a year earlier by the Printing Trade School named after V. A. Baginsky in Kharkiv.
The main problem with the books described above was that they were either slavish compilations of previously existing works or written by people far from practical experience. The work intended to address this issue was “Art of book printing in its historical development” by M. I. Tschelkunov, published in Moscow in 1923. In a noteworthy preface, the author lamented the lack of studies specifically devoted to the history of the art of book printing, and promised, “not to leave a single fact without careful verification—no matter how difficult it may be,[7]” in his work. The multifaceted personality of M. I. Tschelkunov—a passionate bibliophile, public figure, journalist, and teacher who, importantly, began his life path as an apprentice in a printing house—was an ideal fit for this task. The resulting work covered the history of writing and book printing worldwide and in the West, and included a section on book printing in Russia from its origins to the 20th century. The book received an award from the Central commission for the improvement of scientists’ living conditions.[8]
In 1924–1925, the two-volume “The book in Russia”, edited by V. Ya. Adaryukov and A. A. Sidorov, was published in Moscow. The preface stated that the edition “aims to, perhaps for the first time, review and make clear and distinct the picture of the development of book trade in Russia—and not only of book trade, but also of the art of the book”.[9]
The first volume was devoted to the handwritten book as well as the printed book of the 16th to 18th centuries. The second volume was entirely devoted to the book of the 19th century. Equipped with notes and a bibliography, this two-volume work represents the most scholarly attempt during this period to describe the history of Russian book design, sharing the typical strengths and weaknesses of any scholarly collection of articles by various authors.
In 1926, M. I. Tschelkunov published a revised and expanded edition of his 1923 book, retitled “History, technique, and art of book printing”. This second edition received extensive coverage in the press and became one of the most extensively reviewed domestic books on the subject. Despite Tschelkunov’s claims of progressiveness and adherence to the scientific method, his bibliophile approach—clearly rooted in the 19th century—is strongly felt throughout the book. Rather than an original historical study, it is more of an eclectic—albeit the most comprehensive—collection of facts drawn from other works.
Practice
The form given by I. D. Galaktionov to the mentioned above “Conversations of a typesetter” is quite interesting. The practical part of the book takes the form of a dialogue between an old and a young typesetter. This case is unique in Russian-language literature on the topic, though it has a counterpart in Western literature. However, while “The old and the new” by Th. L. de Vinne, first published in 1895,[10] was entirely crafted in the spirit of Renaissance philosophical dialogues, “Conversations of a typesetter” is much more realistic, resembling a fictionalized memoir enriched with quotations from pre-revolutionary typographic manuals.
In the 1920s, V. I. Anisimov, who held various important positions in the printing industry after the revolution, published a number of books on typography and related topics, beautifully designed and printed at the former Golike and Wilborg Partnership printing house, where fine editions of Mir Iskusstva were published as early as in the 1910s. Among Anisimov’s editions directly related to our topic are “Osnovy knizhnogo nabora” (The elements of book typesetting) (1922), as well as individual pages from the books “Osnovy i risovanie pechatnogo shrifta” (The elements and drawing of printed type) (1922) and “Spuskanie form, opredelenie i ustanovka formata” (Laying down of forms, determining and setting a format) (1923). Initially, the books were met with great interest, although the appropriateness of publishing practical literature in such expensive design was questioned.[11] Unfortunately, it later turned out that most books credited to V. I. Anisimov were translations of excerpts from books by Friedrich Bauer, a German author, whose “Handbuch für Schriftsetzer” (Manual for typesetters) translated by V. I. Anisimov himself, was published as early as 1911 at the same Golike and Wilborg printing house. After repeated accusations of plagiarism,[12] V. I. Anisimov ceased publishing. In 1933, posthumously, two brochures devoted to purely technical printing issues were published, very modestly designed.
In 1925 in Leningrad, Friedrich Bauer’s “Anfangsgründe für Schriftsetzer-Lehrlinge” (Typesetter’s Primer) appeared in A. K. Schulz’s translation under the title “Azbuka naborschika”. It was a version of Bauer’s own “Manual for typesetters” that he himself had abridged.
In 1926, a slightly abridged reissue of the pre-revolutionary work “Naborno-tipografskoe delo” (“Typesetting and typographic trade”) by I. F. Bogdanov was published in Leningrad under the editorship of I. D. Galaktionov and under the new title “Nabornoe delo” (“Typesetting trade”). This book, written in a question-and-answer format, had been published three times before the revolution, although the title page of Galaktionov’s edition, for some reason, states that this edition is the sixth.[13]
A number of publications on typesetting and make-up techniques were issued in Zlatoust, Kaluga, Odessa and Yaroslavl.
In 1924, the work “Teoriya nabora” (“Theory of typesetting”) by N. P. Proskurnin, director of the local typographic school, was published in Rostov-on-Don. Judging by the references in the text to “the old and the new movements” in jobbing work, the book was written drawing on other sources, apparently including the works of A. Waldow and J. A. Heilmayer. Even if Proskurnin’s work was not entirely original, the author succeeded in selecting and succintly summarizing the points most important for book designers, without overloading the text with technical detail. “Theory of typesetting” provides basic information not only on typesetting and make-up (including the make-up of illustrations), but also on the composition of books, and in addition contains a large number of original examples.
In 1925, “Osnovy aktsidentnogo nabora” (“Elements of jobbing composition”) by J. A. Heilmayer and a reader titled “Osobye vidy nabora” (“Special kinds of typesetting”) were published in the same city. The first book is an excerpt from “Lehrbuch für Buchdrucker: Satz” (Printer’s Textbook: Typesetting) by the Viennese typographer Josef A. Heilmayer, translated by N. P. Proskurnin. Before the revolution, Proskurnin had trained in Leipzig and Vienna, where he apparently became acquainted with the little-known work of Heilmayer. It is notable that another author and former typesetter, V. I. Anisimov, also completed his professional education in Leipzig, at the Academy of Graphic Arts.[14] The books on book design published by Proskurnin and Anisimov during the NEP period rank among the most elegantly designed publications on the subject.
The second book, “Osobye vidy nabora,” includes excerpts from the works of F. Bauer, I. Mikhailov, A. Osetsky, and S. A. Tsorn, all focused on difficult composition.
In 1925, the books “Tekhnika knigi” (“Technology of the book”) by M. M. Dmitriev and “Spravochnaya knizhka naborschika” (“Typesetter’s little reference book”) by A. M. Sokolov were published in Kharkov. The authors cooperated closely, as mentioned in the preface to “Tekhnika knigi”.
The book by M. M. Dmitriev, intended for “workers of provincial printing houses”,[15] besides the standard sections devoted to both straight and difficult composition, also includes new chapters—“Manuscript preparation for printing” and “Book montage”. In the chapter “Manuscript preparation...”, we find one of the earliest mentions of the profession of technical editor, who would become as noted above the Soviet equivalent of a book designer.
Compiled by A. M. Sokolov, “Spravochnaya knizhka naborschika” appears more old-fashioned, being a compilation of valuable information on the subject, including descriptions of techniques which Proskurnin and Dmitriev tried to omit in their works. In this respect, Sokolov, who also published in 1925 the “Karmanny tekhnichesky kalendar’ poligraficheskogo proizvodstva” (“Pocket technical calendar of polygraphic production”), resembles Galaktionov, the author of “Tipografsky kalendar’”. Nevertheless, Sokolov’s book includes all the basic information on the composition of books, typesetting, and make-up. Special attention is given to the typesetting of title pages.
It should be noted that both “Tekhnika knigi” and “Spravochnaya knizhka naborschika” include short sections, inspired by A. M. Gan’s work “Konstruktivizm” (Constructivism), which welcome the new, “constructive”, method of composition.
In 1926, the second edition of “Tekhnika knigi” by M. M. Dmitriev was published.
The three books described above—N. P. Proskurnin’s “Teoriya nabora”, M. M. Dmitriev’s “Tekhnika knigi”, and A. M. Sokolov’s “Spravochnaya knizhka naborschika”—were published in large cities, but still not in Leningrad or Moscow. They represent the most important works on book design published during the NEP period, which was generally characterized by this kind of “strengthening” of the provinces.
In 1926, a translation of Friedrich Bauer’s “Das Buch als Werk des Buchdruckers” (The book as a printer’s work) was published in Moscow under the title “Kniga kak sozdanie pechatnika”. Unlike Bauer’s other rather dry manuals, this book is written in a more intimate tone. In four chapters, the author reflects on the relationships between paper format, type area, typeface, and margins. The author of the preface compares Bauer’s work to the previously mentioned theoretical collection by P. Renner, noting that Bauer still “stands firmly on the ground of technology”.[16]
At the end of 1926, “Nabornoe delo” (“Typesetting trade”) by S. V. Arbuzov was published in the same city. Although this work remains closely connected in content with the pre-revolutionary manuals by Kolomnin and Bogdanov, it includes original digressions which, as the author admits in his preface, are drawn from the German journal “Unterrichts-Briefe für Buchdrucker” (Educational letters for printers). The author’s attempts to establish “exact rules for the calculation, arrangement, and grouping of lines” [17] for jobbing composition are notable, as they prefigure the constructivist explorations of theorists in the early 1930s.
In 1927, the brochure “Pamyatka naborschika o nabore tablits” (Typesetter’s guide to table composition) was published by the Khamovniki district FZU school in Moscow. It includes a theoretical section as well as a section with exercises for apprentice typesetters. In 1932, the brochure was reissued with minor changes by the FZU School at printing house No. 2 of Sevkraypoligraftrest, located in Vologda.
Journals
No major typographic journals were published in the former capital, Leningrad, during the NEP period.
In 1922 the only issue of the journal “Yuny tekhnik-tipograf” (“Young typographic technician”) was issued by the First state practical and training printing house and school. Among other items, it contained a passionate note “Krasota knigi” (“The beauty of the book”) by A. K. Schulz, in which he urges Soviet typesetters to emulate the craftsmen of Renaissance Florence.
A more substantial attempt to publish an industry journal was the periodical “Pechatny dvor” (“Print yard”), issued from 1923 to 1930 by the printing house of the same name in Leningrad. In the early years of its publication, I. D. Galaktionov was listed as the editor responsible for the journal. It appears that he, under various pseudonyms, mainly supplied the journal with both retellings of old books and original materials.
We mentioned these two Leningrad periodicals as those that contain materials relevant to our topic. In addition to them, numerous other periodicals were issued by printing institutions in Leningrad, and they still remain to be examined.[18]
As for small towns that had fewer than 100,000 inhabitants during the NEP period, we do not yet know of any articles on book design, regardless of their quality, published in local periodicals. The article “O vyorstke, igre shriftom i prochem” (“On make-up, type play, and other things”) by I. Amsky (the pseudonym of I. P. Abramsky), published in the only issue of the “Zhurnal Vitebskogo otdeleniya ROSTA” (“Journal of the Vitebsk branch of ROSTA”) in 1921, may be regarded as such only with reservations, since Vitebsk, despite fluctuations in its population, was already a major cultural center.
However, it was precisely during the NEP period that the real “golden age” of provincial periodicals, related in one way or another to our topic, began. Across the country, trade unions and printing enterprises started to publish their own periodicals, ranging from factory newspapers to wall newspapers, one-day papers, and the jubilee issues of journals.
We will list only those periodicals that were published for more than one year: “Amursky tipograf” (“Amur typographer”, Blagoveshchensk, 1922–1923), “Byulleten’ Tyumenskogo gubernskogo otdela Vserossiyskogo soyuza rabochikh poligraficheskogo proizvodstva” (“Bulletin of the Tyumen provincial department of the All-Russian union of printing industry workers”, Tyumen, 1921–1922), “Volynsky pechatnik” (“Volyn printer”, Zhytomyr, 1923–1924), “Golos pechatnika” (“Printer’s voice”, Bakhmut, 1923–1924), “Naborschik”, later renamed to “Poligraf” (“Typesetter”, Smolensk, 1922–1924), “Nashe pechatnoe slovo” (“Our printed word”, Krasnoyarsk, 1921–1924), “Pechatnik Altaya” (“Printer of Altai”, Barnaul, 1923–1924), “Poligraf-rabotnik” (“Polygraphic worker”, Tyumen, 1922–1924), “Poligrafist” (“Polygraphist”, Tomsk, 1923–1924), “Slovo pechatnika” (“Printer’s word”, Ryazan, 1918–1923).[19]
Of course, the theory of book design was scarcely discussed in trade union bulletins and factory newspapers. Their typical contents were: the presentation of the party line, the discussion of workers’ labor conditions at a particular enterprise, their living and leisure conditions. Sometimes there was a humor page.[20] Periodicals published by printing schools could be more interesting for our topic, since their authors were not party activists but talented teachers who simultaneously contributed to major trade periodicals.
The journals “Na smenu” (“On shift”, 1924–1925) in Kharkov and “Sputnik yunogo pechatnika” (“Young printer’s companion”, 1922–1925) in Krasnodar were such periodicals published by printing schools where future typesetters and printers studied. Only one issue of each of the periodicals “Donskaya poligraficheskaya shkola” (“Don Polygraphic School”, 1923) and “Trud pechatnika” (“Printer’s work”, 1924) was published by the Don State Polygraphic School in Rostov-on-Don. Additionally, the journal “Yuny pechatnik” (“Young printer”, 1925–1928) was published there for four years.[21]
The journal “Na smenu” was published for two years by the Experimental School of Printing Trade named after A. V. Baginsky in Kharkiv. It published notable materials from the instructors A. M. Sokolov, I. Ya. Kruglyakov, and others, as well as examples of jobbing compositions produced by students under the guidance of instructors. The responsible editor of the first issues of the journal was L. E. Kaplan. In 1925, the only Ukrainian-language issue of the journal (titled “Na zminu”) was published, after which the journal ceased publication.
The Krasnodar journal “Sputnik yunogo pechatnika” was published by the Vocational School “Polygraphic art”. It published materials on the practice and history of book design, generally not original texts but excerpts from books (by F. Bauer, F. I. Bulgakov), often without attribution to the author.
The only issue of the journal “Trud pechatnika” (“Printer’s work”) was published by the Don State Polygraphic School, headed by N. P. Proskurnin. This single issue stands out for its quality of design, editorial preparation, and variety of content. A section from Proskurnin’s “Teoriya nabora” was included as the only practical article on book design. However, an adjacent article discusses the history of the creation of this book.[22] A number of memoirs were also included. From the text concerning the Krasnoyarsk School of Printing Trade, it is known, for example, that its students produced 21 issues of the manuscript journal “Yuny truzhenik” (“Young hard worker”) and 13 issues of the wall newspaper “Yuny pechatnik” (“Young printer”),[23] which also appeared in the pages of the aforementioned Krasnoyarsk journal “Nashe pechatnoe slovo”.
In large cities, there were attempts to organize more substantial periodicals at the branches of the Union of Printing Industry Workers. For example, eight issues of the journal “Yekaterinoslavsky pechatnik” (“Yekaterinoslav printer”) were published from 1922 to 1924 in Yekaterinoslav (now Dnipro). “Pechatnik Gruzii” (“Printer of Georgia”) was published in Tiflis (now Tbilisi) from 1925 to 1926, appearing as a newspaper in the first year and as a journal in the second. In total, 10 issues were published. The list could be extended, but the numbers remained small. Almost all such journals published outside Moscow were short-lived and irregular.[24]
The only notable exception was the journal “Kharkovsky pechatnik” (“Kharkiv printer”, 1923–1929), published in Kharkiv for seven years and renamed “Drukar” (“Printer” in Ukrainian) in 1927. The aforementioned L. E. Kaplan contributed in the early issues with material in the spirit of publications from typography schools—a fictionalized memoir titled “Apprenticeship in the underground”. Other Ukrainian authors such as S. A. Tsorn, A. M. Sokolov, I. Ya. Kruglyakov also contributed to “Kharkovsky pechatnik”. By the end of NEP period, “Kharkovsky pechatnik” was probably the second most important periodical in the Soviet Union, that regularly published materials on typesetting and make-up.
As to L. E. Kaplan, in the mid-1920s he moved to Moscow, where he became the technical editor of a new polygraphic journal. Originally named “Graficheskoe iskusstvo” (“Graphic Art”) when founded in 1924, the journal was renamed in 1925 to “Poligraficheskoe proizvodstvo” (“Polygraphic production”, usually translated as “Printing production” or simply “Printing”). In 1964, the journal, by then almost entirely devoted to printing equipment, was renamed “Poligrafiya” (“Polygraphy”). It remained under this name until the late 1990s, when it was discontinued.
However, in the 1920s, immediately after its founding, the journal quickly became the leading periodical on our topic. A circle of Moscow authors soon formed around it and later joined its editorial board. These were L. E. Kaplan, S. I. Reshetov, and V. V. Popov. The first two not only published articles on typesetting and make-up in the journal but were also authors of numerous books on the subject, including voluminous textbooks on typesetting for FZU schools and printing colleges. V. V. Popov, an outstanding expert on printing and the author of a repeatedly reprinted general course on polygraphy, eventually became the de facto chief editor of the journal.[25] There, he primarily published reviews of professional literature and also wrote a column on news from the world of foreign printing equipment.
Of course, the main professional journal covered the industry as a whole. Articles on book design, book typesetting, and make-up occupied only a relatively modest place in it. Nevertheless, it is notable that the authors who wrote specifically on these subjects were both at the journal’s origins and later at its helm. L. E. Kaplan and S. I. Reshetov continued to publish interesting pieces on typesetting and make-up in the journal even after the Second World War, when public interest in the field of book design had shifted from the work of typesetters and technical editors to the role of the artistic editor (roughly comparable to an art director).
The journals “Pechatnik” (“Printer”, published by the Central committee of the Union of printing industry workers from 1922 to 1930), “Moskovsky pechatnik” (“Moscow printer”, published by the Moscow Governorate Branch of the same union from 1921 to 1926, after which it merged with “Pechatnik”), and “Zhurnalist” (“Journalist”, published by the newspaper “Pravda” (“Truth”) and the Union of journalists of the USSR from 1920 to 1933, after which it was renamed “Bol’shevistskaya pechat’” (“Bolshevist press”)) were journals from related fields that also published articles on book design. From 1922 to 1925, three issues of the journal “Sovremennik” (“Contemporary”) were published by the State institute of journalism. All these journals were published in Moscow.
In 1925 and 1926, two issues of the reference publication “Gazetny i knizhny mir” (“Newspaper and book world”), which included some materials on book design, were also published in Moscow. In 1926, the collection “Trudy Pervogo vserossiyskogo bibliograficheskogo syezda” (Works of the First all-Russian bibliographic congress), containing a section devoted to book history, was published in Moscow.
A number of bibliophile periodicals were published, including the Moscow journals “Sredi kollektsionerov” (“Among the collectors”) and “Gravyura and kniga” (“Engraving and book”), as well as the journal “Kazan bibliophile” in Kazan.
It is important to mention bibliographic journals, which rarely published articles on our topic, but regularly featured reviews of new books on book design. The journal of criticism, bibliography, and book trade “Knigonosha” (“Book peddler”, 1923–1926) was published in Moscow. The literary and critical journal “Pechat’ i revolyutsia” (“Printing and revolution”, 1921–1930), which featured articles and reviews by Moscow authors such as A. A. Sidorov and M. I. Tschelkunov, was also published in Moscow for many years.
The Ukrainian-language journal “Bibliologichni visti” (“News of bibliology”, 1923–1930) was published in Kyiv. Although most of its articles were devoted to bibliography, library science, book history, and contemporary book graphic art, it also featured both general articles on book design [26] and pieces concerning book design practice (including Galaktionov’s article on typesetting rules [27] and material on “book hygiene” [28] referring to the pre-revolutionary work by A. F. Nikitin).
The aforementioned journal “Kniga i revolyutsia” (“Book and revolution”) was published in Petrograd up to and including 1923. I. D. Galaktionov effectively summed up his work as a reviewer in this journal in his survey article “Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu s 1917 g.” (“Literature on polygraphic production since 1917”), which appeared in one of its final issues.
In 1927, V. V. Popov published an analogous article under the title “Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu za 10 let (1917–1927)” (“Literature on polygraphic production over 10 years (1917–1927)”) in the Moscow journal “Pechat’ i revolyutsia”. The author not only critically described the books that had been published on the subject, but also documented in detail the instances of plagiarism found in Anisimov’s publications. With this article, V. V. Popov initiated a kind of tradition. He later published similar articles in 1947, on the revolution’s thirtieth anniversary, and in 1967, on its fiftieth anniversary.
Late articles by Popov, although covering a wider range of years, lose depth and sharpness. In them, interest in typesetting and make-up gradually fades. However, Popov’s first article from 1927, along with Galaktionov’s 1923 material, serve as an excellent resource on the history of Soviet book design literature published during the Civil war and NEP periods.
References
[1] Poligraficheskoe proizvodstvo / Sostavitel’ L. E. Kaplan; pod redaktsiey i s dopolneniyami N. V. Samokatova. [Kharkov]: Gosizdat Ukrainy, 1925. P. 4.
[2] Tarabukin N. M. Iskusstvo dnya: [Chto nuzhno znat’, chtoby sdelat’ plakat, lubok, reklamu, smontirovat’ knigu, gazetu, afishu i kakie vozmozhnosti otkryvaet fotomekhanika]. Moscow: [Vserossiysky proletkult], 1925. P. 64.
[3] Tschelkunov M. I. Ob osnovnykh pravilakh tipografskogo iskusstva... // Dvadsat pyat’ zasedaniy Komissii po izucheniyu iskusstva knigi pri Gosudarstvennom izdatel’stve. 1922. 1923. 1924. [M.: Gosizdat, 1924.] P. 55–61.
[4] Knigopechatanie kak iskusstvo: Tipografy i izdateli XVIII—XX vekov o sekretakh svoyego remesla. Moscow: Kniga, 1987. P. 370.
[5] V. V. Popov describes this book as having a “propagandistic character”, meaning that it is more popular than specialized. See: Popov V. V. Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu za 10 let (1917–1927). Obzor // Pechat’ i revolutsia. 1927, Issue 6, September. Pp. 127, 128.
[6] Shponik. Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu s 1917 g. // Kniga i revolyutsia. 1923, No. 2 (26). P. 41.
[7] Tschelkunov M. I. Iskusstvo knigopechataniya v ego istoricheskom razvitii. Moscow: Gosudarstvenny Institut Zhurnalistiki, 1923. P. VII.
[8] Tschelkunov M. I. Istoriya, tekhnika, iskusstvo knigopechataniya. Moscow: Gosizdat, 1926. P. VII.
[9] Preface to parts I and II // Kniga v Rossii. Part one: from the beginning of writing to 1800. Moscow: Gosizdat, 1924. P. 5.
[10] De Vinne, Theo. L. The old and the new // The book-lover’s almanac for the year 1896. New York: Durpat & Co. Publishers, 1895. Pp. 41–49. The Russian translation of the dialogue was first published in the collection Knigopechatanie kak iskusstvo: Tipografy i izdateli XVIII—XX vekov o sekretakh svoyego remesla. Moscow: Kniga, 1987.
[11] Shponik. Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu s 1917 g. // Kniga i revolyutsia. 1923, No. 2 (26). P. 40.
[12] See, e. g.: Sidorov A. A. Anisimov, V. “Gravirovanie tsvetnykh ofortov i estampov” // Sredi kollektsionerov. 1922, April, No. 4. Pp. 51–52; Tschelkunov M. I. Izdaniya V. I. Anisimova po knizhnomu delu // Sovremennik. 1922, Issue 1. Pp. 418–422; Popov V. V. Literatura po poligraficheskomu proizvodstvu za 10 let (1917–1927). Obzor // Pechat’ i revolutsia. 1927, Issue 6, September. P. 128 and ff.
[13] It is known that in 1925 a small excerpt from Bogdanov’s work concerning printing technique was published in Rostov-on-Don.
[14] Biografiya Vladimira Ilyitcha Anisimova // Anisimov V. I. Chto dolzhen znat’ tipografsky pechatnik, rabotayutschiy na skoropechatnoy mashine. Leningrad: Shkola FZU Lenprompechatsoyuza, 1933. P. V.
[15] Dmitriev M. Tekhnika knigi. [Kharkov]: Proletary, 1925. P. VI.
[16] Predislovie k russkomy perevodu // Bauer F. Kniga kak sozdanie pechatnika / Perevod s nemetskogo Ivana Veynbendera. Moscow; Leningrad: Gosizdat, 1926. P. 6.
[17] Arbuzov S. Nabornoe delo. M.: Gostekhizdat, 1927. P. XI.
[18] It is worth noting that L. I. Gessen, a prominent theorist of the period following the NEP, first published his apology in the factory newspaper “Za leninskuyu knigu” (“For the Leninist book”). This circumstance speaks in favor of the hypothesis that such institutional periodicals may contain materials of interest. See: Editors, Preface // Gessen L. I. Oformlenie knigi. [L.:] OGIZ, 1935. P. 4. For a list of factory newspapers of the printing industry, mostly from Moscow and Leningrad, see Andreyeva O. V. Istoriya knizhnogo dela v dokumentalnykh istochnikakh i materialakh periodicheskoy pechati. Moscow: MGUP, 2011. Appendix 4.
[19] See: Periodicheskaya pechat’ SSSR. 1917–1949. [Volume 9]: Zhurnaly, trudy i byulleteni po voprosam pechati, bibliotechnogo dela i bibliografii. Moscow: Vsesoyuznaya knizhnaya palata, 1959. Pp. 24–30.
[20] Nonetheless, provincial typographic periodicals have their own historical value. Scattered across libraries in various towns, these fragile and rare editions should be examined. Even if they do not contain information on book design—which still needs to be proven—these publications will definitely shed light on the history of provincial typography, without which it is difficult to envision the further development of regional design traditions.
[21] Popovyan L. K. Albom v isporchennom pereplyote: istoriya sozdaniya i pervykh let deyatelnosti Donskoy gosudarstvennoy poligraficheskoy shkoly // Knizhnoe delo na Severnov Kavkaze: metody, istochniki, opyt issledovaniy. Rostov-on-Don: Donskaya gosudarstvennaya publichnaya biblioteka, 2018. Pp. 337–359.
[22] Proskurnin N. Teoriya nabora i pechataniya i spetsuchebniki // Trud pechatnika. 1924, January—March, Issue 1. Pp. 43–44.
[23] Lvov V. Krasnoyarskaya shkola pechnatnogo dela // Trud pechatnika. 1924, January–March, Issue 1. P. 48.
[24] See: Periodicheskaya pechat’ SSSR. 1917–1949. [Volume 9]: Zhurnaly, trudy i byulleteni po voprosam pechati, bibliotechnogo dela i bibliografii. Moscow: Vsesoyuznaya knizhnaya palata, 1959. Pp. 24–30.
[25] Not being a party member, V. V. Popov could not officially hold the position of editor-in-chief. E. L. Nemirovsky mentions this in his memoir: Moi poligraficheskiye universitety // CompuArt. 2000, No. 4.
[26] Makarenko Mykola. Mistetstvo knizhki // Bibliologichni visti. 1924, January–March. Pp. 94–100.
[27] Galaktionov I. Pro tekhnichni pravyla skladannya // Bibliologichni visti. 1926, No. 4. Pp. 62–69.
[28] Popovych A. Do otsinky knygy z poglyadu gigieny zoru // Bibliologichni visti. 1927, No. 3. Pp. 75–78.