|
ModLib Archive Messages containing "carlton house" |
||
| 2 Threads found: Thread Name: Carlton House From: J B Krygier <jbkrygier@removed> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:27:56 -0500 An interesting pile of "Carlton House" books can be seen in this eBay auction (I am not promoting this auction!): [Dead Link] Carlton House was (if I recall) a 'cheaper' version of the ML put out by Random House - there are several different bindings and designs (they varied over the years). Each one I have seen is printed from the same plates as the ML edition. The books are designed to look a bit like ML editions but neither the ML or Random House are noted on the books (in the few I have seen). Not sure what the DJs on these looked like. A curious ML related series that does not get mentioned very often! ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- Thread Name: Carlton House and Modern Library? From: owenh81565 at gmail.com ((Owen Hester) Date: Mon Apr 2 20:22:18 2007 What is the connection between Carlton House and Modern LIbrary? I have a copy of Best Russian Short Stories published by Carlton House. There is not a torchbearer in sight, but inside there is a Boni Liveright copyright and a Modern Library copyright. ------------------------------------- From: aa3401 at wayne.edu ((Gordon Neavill) Date: Mon Apr 2 20:41:57 2007 Carlton House was an imprint Cerf and Klopfer used from the early 1930s (maybe before) into the 1950s. It was used mainly for "specials" intended primarily for sale by department stores. The books were often printed from ML plates and were generally works in the public domain. It's curious that when they started branching out from their core ML business they went in two very different directions -- fine limited editions and super-cheap stuff for department stores. If printing costs dipped temporarily they would take advantage of it and run off a batch of Carloton House books. ------------------------------------- From: archetype at 20ants.com ((Michael Watson) Date: Mon Apr 2 23:51:15 2007 My guess is that "printing costs" largely depended on the cost of paper and not the actual cost of the printing process which was labor and the amortization of capital equipment. It was the same then as now... Publishers beat the paper suppliers down on pricing every year for several years until it becomes untenable for the paper suppliers who then hiked the prices back up to where they were several years earlier. Then the publishers beat the paper suppliers down on pricing every year for several years until it becomes untenable for the paper suppliers who then hiked the prices back up to where they were several years earlier. Repeat as necessary for hundreds of years. Honestly, this hasn't changed since printers and paper makers existed simultaneously. Cerf and Klopfer participated in the same stupid dance. No one has had the gumption to change it. ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- |