This was actually the original Ribbonology catalog, and was meant to be a one-off publication–hence the absence of a listed publication date. It was so popular, though, that it became a semiannual publication–the Fall 1920 and Fall 1921 editions are also available to view and download through the site. As far as I know, we don’t have the Spring 1921 edition in the archives–yet. Download PDF ..read more

..read more

..read more

..read more

The first page spread isn’t complete–I only just noticed that my sleeve got in the way of the Quaker Puffed Rice ad, and there’s supposed to be a poem or quote on the first content page that’s been excised. I’ve reached out to a cross-stitch artist in Illinois who has a copy in hopes that she’d be able to provide the missing information, and will update as needed. Update Aug. 2: Have replaced the sleeve-tainted scan with a fresh one in the slideshow and gallery, but have realized that this scan is missing at least two page spreads. Further updates will be made once I’m next able to access the ..read more

Fair warning, some of the pages are out of order in this one. Pages 14/17 are facing each other, and pages 15/16 are facing each other in reverse positions. This is what us archivists call a “hot mess”. Download PDF DOWNLOAD HOT MESS VERSION ..read more

DOWNLOAD PDF ..read more

Now to round out the pair, here’s the second of our two Heminway tie books. I’m not entirely sure what year it’s from, but after scouring the Internet and copyright records I’m reasonably sure it’s from between 1920 and 1923–my educated guess is 1922 or 1923, but don’t take that as expert opinion. DOWNLOAD PDF ..read more

This is the first of two Heminway Tie Books in our collection. I’m actually attempting to make one of the ties, but boy howdy it’s slow going! Who could’ve ever thought that following a 101-year-old pattern book wouldn’t be the best way to learn to crochet? DOWNLOAD PDF Heminway Tie Book No. 1, 1920 ..read more

Shakespeare would be shocked if were able to see the artistic liberties taken with modern stagings of his plays, say the pearl-clutching traditionalists. Would he even recognize his own work filtered through four centuries of bastardization? Would he despair at the state of what passes for entertainment? I actually rather imagine he would–why is the audience so passive?, he may wonder. How come they’re only laughing at the really obvious sex jokes? And are those women onstage? Cultural norm shifts aside, the postmodern “bastardization” of Shakespeare’s and his contemporaries’ plays may be more ..read more