Harvard Removes Human Skin Binding from 19th Century Books

[Turd Fergusen]

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (TMX) -- Harvard University has removed human skin from the binding of a 19th-century text because it was taken without consent from a deceased woman.

Harvard Library announced this month that it had removed human skin from the binding of its 1880s copy of “Des destinées de l’âme” by Arsène Houssaye, which was held at the Houghton Library. The move is based on recommendations from the 2022 Report of the Harvard University Steering Committee on Human Remains in University Museum Collections.

“Harvard Library and the Harvard Museum Collections Returns Committee concluded that the human remains used in the book’s binding no longer belong in the Harvard Library collections, due to the ethically fraught nature of the book’s origins and subsequent history,” the library said in a statement.

The book’s first owner, French physician Dr. Ludovic Bouland (1839–1933), created the binding with the skin of a deceased patient in the hospital where he worked while he was a medical student. The volume has been in the Harvard Library collection since 1934, on deposit from Harvard alumnus John B. Stetson, Jr. (1884–1952), an American diplomat and businessman.


“The book is a meditation on the soul and life after death,” Tom Hyry, Associate University Librarian for Archives and Special Collections, said in a Q&A published by the library on Wednesday. “A handwritten note by Bouland inserted into the volume states that ‘a book about the human soul deserved to have a human covering.’”

A lost memo that originally came with the book when it was donated, written by Stetson, indicated that Bouland took the skin from a deceased woman patient at a French psychiatric hospital.

An internal review into the library’s stewardship of the book revealed that although it was only publicly confirmed to be bound in human skin in 2014 — in a “sensationalistic, morbid” blog post — students of decades past were well aware.

Full Article:

Harvard removes human skin binding from 19th century book

Harvard University has removed human skin from the binding of a 19th-century text because it was taken without consent from a deceased woman.

www.wsaz.com

 

[Ella Mayo]

Consent is everything.

Oxford U. had a similar case, where some guy's taxidermied cock was being used as a bookmark, without having been willed so by the decedent's estate.

This shit just writes itself.

};^D

Beer fuckin' o'clock, muthafuckaz.

 

[thuumpr]

Without the skin, what keeps the insides in?

 

[Metalfan]

I prefer Skin mags anyway.

 

[cubby]

I do understand why they are removing the skin, but what does that accomplish other than giving a 200 year dead woman her dignity back. What will happen to the skin at this point, will they ethically destroy it, or will they just toss it. If they are just going to toss it, then I propose leaving it as is will be better than just destroying it, put it somewhere out of sight in an appropriate setting and leave it alone.

And how do they know it was taken without permission? Did the doctor say he just stole it?

 

[Josh P]

And how do they know it was taken without permission? Did the doctor say he just stole it?

Maybe someone asked the dead woman? One of those 1-900 psychic hotlines said she lost her ass and wants it back.

 

[thuumpr]

Was she dead when they started harvesting it?

 

[agm8478]

This irrepressible urge to rewrite history for the sake of political correctness is wrong on so many levels. If the woman was dead it’s just dead tissue. This isn’t complicated. In case the science is confusing, ITS DEAD TISSUE. No different than fingernail clippings or hair.
Removing it from the book makes no sense. Why is this different than any other leather?

 

[Blunderbuss Firozabad]

This irrepressible urge to rewrite history for the sake of political correctness is wrong on so many levels. If the woman was dead it’s just dead tissue. This isn’t complicated. In case the science is confusing, ITS DEAD TISSUE. No different than fingernail clippings or hair.
Removing it from the book makes no sense. Why is this different than any other leather?

You know how it goes. If they got to have one, everybody would want one.

What we should REALLY be concerned about??

-Shamisens.

The blank staring eyes of Hello Kitty make a little more sense now.

Controversial musical instrument made of cat skins continues to cause disputes

The Shamisen, a traditional Japanese guitar-like instrument beloved of traditional geisha, is under threat as animal activists say that making them out of cat skin is inhumane

www.dailystar.co.uk

Kaibyō - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Post automatically merged: Apr 20, 2024

I do understand why they are removing the skin, but what does that accomplish other than giving a 200 year dead woman her dignity back. What will happen to the skin at this point, will they ethically destroy it, or will they just toss it. If they are just going to toss it, then I propose leaving it as is will be better than just destroying it, put it somewhere out of sight in an appropriate setting and leave it alone.

And how do they know it was taken without permission? Did the doctor say he just stole it?

You alway ask interesting questions.
I think because as a student, his only interaction with her was as a cadaver for learning?

"The book’s first owner, French physician Dr. Ludovic Boulanch (1839–1933), created the binding with the skin of a deceased patient in the hospital where he worked while he was a med student."

And:

"The use of cadaver in the United States followed a strictly similar path as Europe. In 1832, the Anatomy Act Anatomy Act mandated that unclaimed bodies would play the central role in anatomical dissection, but this act was repeatedly manipulated or ignored.
This was because of a pattern that emerged to clearly show that their unethical means to get a body from grave to dissection table.
Examples are grave robbing, body snatching of the poor or simply using unclaimed bodies. The bodies were usually those of deceased convicts, the poor, slaves or the mentally ill."


I think it's inferred, but not known specifically.
The doctor, the binder of the book, left a cryptic note between the pages.
It didn't signal anything to me but it might to you. It's in the original article

A Deep Dive into The History of Cadaver Use and Whole Body Donation - Research for Life

The use of cadavers to further education of the human body was developed in the third century with the establishment of the school of Greek medicine in Alexandria. Before human dissection, knowledge of medicine was based largely on observation, supposition, the study of animals, and the...

researchforlife.org

 

[thuumpr]

This irrepressible urge to rewrite history for the sake of political correctness is wrong on so many levels. If the woman was dead it’s just dead tissue. This isn’t complicated. In case the science is confusing, ITS DEAD TISSUE. No different than fingernail clippings or hair.
Removing it from the book makes no sense. Why is this different than any other leather?

The difference is that a person didn't bind a book in fingernail clippings or hair. They probably didn't make an offer of their skin. Kinda ruins an open coffin funeral.

Have only ever heard of human skin book binding with reference to the victims of the Holocaust (who have never gave the okay)... book bindings, lamp shades, etc.

But then the article states the reason for removing the book ... Harvard University has removed human skin from the binding of a 19th-century text because it was taken without consent from a deceased woman.

Purely a matter of respect... doubt the woman filed the complaint.

 

[Symmachus]

The dead woman should have signed a non-binding contract beforehand.