Chinese paper, and all aspects of its manufacture, holds an important place in the study of handmade paper. Generally accepted as the birthplace of papermaking, China should logically be the site for the most extensive and detailed research of papermaking, both as it is currently practiced and, by extrapolation, how it might have been performed in ancient times. The logic of this study, however, has been overwhelmed by military, political, and social upheavals that have swept through China for over a century, making it a very difficult place to travel in, let alone to do research. Even now, after much of the smoke has cleared, it is still difficult to gain access to the areas that are of greatest interest to hand papermaking researchers. Despite the difficulties inherent in studying in China, research has progressed in nearby areas. In recent years much valuable work on Asian papermaking has been done by Timothy Barrett, whose thorough study of the Japanese craft has added significantly to our knowledge of that subject (see his Japanese Papermaking: Traditions, Tools, and Techniques. New York: Weatherhill, 1983). The Japanese, however, while historically willing to accept cultural influences from China, have changed the particulars to make them uniquely Japanese and, therefore, at least one step removed from the original. (As Korea was the bridge between papermaking in China and Japan and is credited with its own innovations, papermaking in Korea constitutes an intermediate stage.) To get closer to the source, one must actually go to China, a feat all but impossible for Westerners until only fifteen years ago. Elaine Koretsky of Carriage House Handmade Paper Works has managed to travel to China twice in the past five years. She has written extensively about her research in The Guild of Book Workers Journal, Hand Papermaking (cf. v. 1, no. 1, pp. 2-6), and other journals and monographs, and reports that, even with the recent political thaw, it is still discouragingly difficult to visit traditional centers of hand papermaking. Even when such visits have been arranged, all too often she has met with the sight of a traditional operation supplanted by new, Western-style papermills using Hollander beaters and even, in one case, a small Fourdrinier. Can Chinese researchers do any better? The only recent, extensive work on Chinese papermaking by a Chinese scholar in English is, to this reviewer's knowledge, by Dr. Tsien Tsuen-hsuin. His Paper and Printing, volume 5, part I of Joseph Needham's Science and Civilisation in China (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1985), relies almost exclusively upon previously published sources. While this information is certainly very valuable, it does not fill the need for more direct observation of Chinese hand papermaking. This gap in the literature -- an extensive, detailed, eye-witness account of Chinese hand papermaking -- seemed impossible to fill until the hand of serendipity (one of the most pervasive, if uncredited, research tools known to scholars) made its move. Elaine Koretsky, while doing research at the National Arboretum in Washington, D.C., was told by Dr. Frederick G. Meyer that he was in possession of a large collection of Chinese handmade paper gathered by Floyd A. McClure in the 1920s and 1930s. A careful examination of this collection over the ensuing years uncovered Dr. McClure's notes and the typescript of his Master's thesis on Chinese paper. Dr. Floyd A. McClure (1897-1970), generally regarded as the world's foremost authority on bamboo, lived, studied, and taught in China from 1919 until 1941. Teaching botany at Lingnan University (originally Canton Christian College) in the southern Chinese city of Canton, Dr. McClure traveled extensively throughout China to collect live specimens of over six hundred different species of bamboo for his research garden at Lingnan and, as Plant Explorer for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, sent approximately two hundred and fifty live specimens to the United States. His botanical research led him to become strongly interested in Chinese hand papermaking (which made heavy use of bamboo, among other raw materials). His personal study in this subject led to his 1928 Master's thesis at Ohio State University (during the preparation of which, he visited Dard Hunter at Mountain House in Chillicothe). After he returned to China, McClure attempted to interest the Provost of Lingnan University in financing the publication of his thesis as a book. He was turned down. Aside from a couple of articles published in the Lingnan Science Journal, Dr. McClure's extensive knowledge of Chinese hand papermaking remained untapped. Elaine Koretsky obtained permission from Dr. Meyer and Ruth McClure (Dr. McClure's widow) to attempt to find a publisher for Chinese Handmade Paper, as a means of fulfilling the author's original wish and to advance the field of Chinese handmade paper studies. She approached Henry Morris of Bird & Bull Press who, despite his original uncertainty, threw himself into what was sure to become a difficult project. The result is well worth the obvious effort. The text by Dr. McClure outlines the history, manufacture, and uses of paper in China. Based upon his personal observation throughout China and Chinese-influenced Southeast Asia, Dr. McClure provides detailed descriptions in a clear, uncomplicated prose. As a botanist, his information on the raw materials used in papermaking is particularly valuable, but his scientific training also made him an acute observer of the other aspects of the subject. At one point, for example, he describes the imperfections commonly found in Chinese handmade paper and their causes. The text is accompanied by the author's photographs, careful drawings of the traditional Chinese papermaking equipment, and several beautiful linoleum cuts. After the descriptive text comes the section of paper samples. Accompanied by data on the papers, written by Ms. Koretsky where notes left by Dr. McClure were missing or incomplete, these forty samples are tipped onto the text sheets. The only exception is sample no. 6, for which, although there is a description, the sample is replaced by an apologia by Mr. Morris. After weeks of gluing samples by hand, he simply could not get this especially thin leung chi ("more air than paper," as he describes it) to cooperate. Each description gives information on the use of the paper, the materials used in their manufacture, and the size of the original sheet. The book is rounded off, fore and aft, by Ms. Koretsky's preface and Mr. Morris' endnote. A final, charming touch is provided by the inclusion of a reprint of a leaf from the April 12, 1932 issue of the English-language South China Morning Post. This sheet, along with many others like it, was used to wrap the bundles of paper samples collected by Dr. McClure, the source of the samples tipped into this book. To read the news of more than fifty years ago brings a spooky immediacy to the book and brings Dr. McClure and his work closer to the reader. Both as a valuable text and as a finely-printed and -bound book, Chinese Handmade Paper is an outstanding success. Although, at $260 a copy, it is not a purchase lightly undertaken by many, the quality of the work makes this price more than fair. This is not an instance of either elitism or greed; it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Ms. Koretsky to influence a commerical or university press to publish a book on Chinese papermaking, certain to have limited or marginal sales. Give Mr. Mooris both credit for taking the risk on such a project and congratulations for doing it so well. It is, in short, a book that is destined to become a treasured classic.

‍