Unspun Logo

My Constitution

Posted by Rick · November 4th, 2004 · 9 Comments


Hooray! My Constitution arrived from the evilrooster bindery just in time for a quick read before the election!

So I’m a couple days late with posting about it. So sue me.

In all seriousness, I’m quite happy with it.

This is a hand-bound U.S. Constitution printed on acid-free paper & bound in the “library style” with all archival materials. Five volumes were produced at the evilrooster bindery in Edinburgh, Scotland in the summer of 2004.

I actually tried to order this locally, but everywhere I went, people said, “Constitution? What the hell is that?”

Abi Sutherland made it for me. If I understand things correctly, one of the other four that were made went to President George W. Bush. And just to prove that he’s not completely evil, when King George had finished reading it and said, “Who the hell wrote this crap!?” Karl Rove had the presence of mind to convince him to keep it.

“We’ll put it with the rest of the relics,” he said.

Word is that Abi’s bookbinding website will soon be up at evilrooster.com. When last I checked, the site was not yet fully-functional. I’ve linked it anyway, because since this post will be around for quite some time, future readers may wish to visit evilrooster.

And, Abi, I love it!

Categories: Personal Life


9 responses so far ↓

  • 1 nick meyer // Nov 4, 2004 at 9:35 am


  • 2 abi // Nov 4, 2004 at 10:36 am

    Papa Rick reads to the nation. Nice.

    Your edition of the Constitution is one of a set of five I bound after the one I sent to the President. I learned a lot from that single binding, and decided I could do a better job on a proper set. So I changed a few technical aspects (call me a flip-flopper; I prefer to say I learn from experience).

    The specifics of how yours differs? Yours is typo-free. It’s bound with the paper grain going the correct way, so that it opens easily. It doesn’t have raised bands on the spine – it’s sewn on tapes (like cotton ribbons), because the cord placement dictated the stripe placement on President Bush’s one, and I didn’t like the design that resulted. Yours has a bookmark (just under New Mexico), as I discussed with you, and gold headbands that compliment the book better than the busy stripy ones I did for Dubya. And the red stripes on yours are done of a different leather, one that holds its own against the white.

    Oh, and you’ve written me a thank-you note. Big difference there.

    (<shameless self-promotion>Anyone who’s interested in getting one for yourself, before they’re banned or obselete – contact me. My mother bought one, but there are still three going begging. </shameless self-promotion>)

  • 3 Bob // Nov 4, 2004 at 10:43 am

    Mmmm…why are all those states on the map behind him red? I thought he voted Democrat?

  • 4 Rick Horowitz // Nov 4, 2004 at 10:54 am

    Actually, they’re pink.

    I figured since the only world leader who publicly-supported the re-election of Bush in the last couple weeks was Vladimir Putin, it was appropriate.

    I figured since the United States no longer values individual rights when they conflict with the needs of the State, it was appropriate.

    I figured since I was symbolically reading the Constitution to a nation that supports government sponsorship and underwriting of Corporations, it was appropriate.

    I figured since those who voted for Bush were viewing the world through rose-colored glasses, it was appropriate.

    I figure the country is now officially “pinko,” so it’s appropriate.


  • 5 Bob // Nov 4, 2004 at 11:43 am

    I thought it was because it matched the nice blush in your cheeks…

  • 6 Rick Horowitz // Nov 4, 2004 at 11:45 am

    No, that happened when I was adjusting colors and I got tired of tweaking it. 😉 I got the feeling, too, that it was deceptive — because there’s so much pink in the background, it made me look pinker.

    Or, maybe, I’m starting to come around to the Bush view of the world?

  • 7 Bob // Nov 4, 2004 at 12:36 pm

    Maybe its just your fever for Democracy burning through?

  • 8 abi // Nov 4, 2004 at 3:24 pm

    The whole red/blue thing in the US confuses me, partly because I never watched election coverage before I moved to the UK (I don’t like the ill-will expressed by the parties). It’s the reverse of the American coding over here.

    In the UK, red is Labour, who were (until Blair and New Labour) flaming-red socialists. The party rump still wants to re-nationalise the railroads.

    Blue is for the Conservative Party (the Tories), who still long for the glory days of Maggie Thatcher and her doctrine of privitisation. They don’t believe that there is such a thing as society, or that a government’s role is to serve any greater common good. Classic small-government, low-interference conservatives.

    (Then there’s the Liberal Democrats, in gold, who are hard to nail down on the political spectrum. They tend to be pragmatic rather than doctrinaire. And the Scottish National Party up here, in yellow, who want Scottish independence, or at least control of Scottish politics. Plaid Cymry in Wales are much the same, but I don’t know what color they sport. The Greens get, well, green, but they’re only win in local councils and the European parliament. And the UK Independence Party, and anti-Europe party, seem to be going for purple. And the Monster Raving Loony Party never got enough votes to get a color, though we loved them dearly for their efforts. etc.)

  • 9 Rick Horowitz // Nov 4, 2004 at 4:27 pm

    I’m pretty sure it’s red for the Republicans over here because a) they’re commies and b) they’re bleeding our Constitution of all its protection for individual rights.

Leave a Comment