Thread Name: More First Edition Points Needed For Many Titles From: kamins at modernlib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Mon Jul 2 13:38:10 2007 Folks, Long-time Dogeared/ModernLib member and supporter Barry Miller sent me the following well thought out comments. He's given me permission to post them here for discussion. I'll post my reply to him in a follow- up e-mail: ......... In the past few months I've checked specific ML titles for first edition points, possibly eight or ten times. Don't claim to be` an authority on the fine job you and others have done with this new addition to your webpage. But in every case, as I recall, I've gotten the impression that the indicated points may be insufficient for pinning down whether a book is indeed a first edition. For example, in no instance did I see (so far as I can remember) you use the dating guide. In a way that suits me fine because I find the dating guide highly suspect, especially for later years (late 60s). Sometimes those book catalogs are as much as five years old. I'm delighted to think that a handful of my books from that period which defy accurate dating via the dating guide may be firsts after all. Only yesterday, a friend and fellow ML collector asked me to verify whether two late sixties MLs in his collection are firsts. One of them, The Buddhist Tradition, #205 has a catalog. But that`catalog is way out of whack. So in both cases I fell back on your description whether it's sufficient or not-- stated ML edition on copyright page and #14 binding. You also do not appear to use what might be called secondary issues like DJ back panel style and flyleaf price. Sometimes, I think, those factors help establish the validity of a first; sometimes they cast doubt on it. ........... Scot Kamins ------------------------------------- From: kamins at modernlib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Mon Jul 2 14:01:04 2007 > In the past few months I've checked specific ML titles for first > edition points, possibly eight or ten times. Don't claim to be` an > authority on the fine job you and others have done with this new > addition to your webpage. But in every case, as I recall, I've > gotten the impression that the indicated points may be insufficient > for pinning down whether a book is indeed a first edition. I think you may be right. While I by and large trust the accuracy of the stuff in BookNotes, I too think that in a number of cases there just isn't enough info to be really complete. > For example, in no instance did I see (so far as I can remember) > you use the dating guide. In a way that suits me fine because I > find the dating guide highly suspect, especially for later years > (late 60s). Sometimes those book catalogs are as much as five years > old. I'm delighted to think that a handful of my books from that > period which defy accurate dating via the dating guide may be > firsts after all. Well, yes - anything from 1967 on suspect at least to some degree. And I think you're right about my not using the dating key, even for pre-1967 books. I rely on the number on the DJ inverse. Of course, there are a number of cases -- such as before and after the inverse had such numbers. I'll look more at that. Also, I wonder if there's a reliable way to know which first edition books even HAD catalogs in the back -- could the presence or absence be a loose indicator of First Edition status, at least in the sense of confirming more specific points? > Only yesterday, a friend and fellow ML collector asked me to verify > whether two late sixties MLs in his collection are firsts. One of > them, The Buddhist Tradition, #205 has a catalog. But that`catalog > is way out of whack. So in both cases I fell back on your > description whether it's sufficient or not-- stated ML edition on > copyright page and #14 binding. Yeah. The logos are often helpful as well. Ron has pointed out to me that a number of DJs on an author page are labeled as 1967 vintage -- dated as they were based on the catalogs at the end of the book because the DJ images were sent to me BEFORE we knew about the unreliability of post-1967 catalogs -- when you can tell from the logos and other hints that the DJs are 1969-1970 vintage. > You also do not appear to use what might be called secondary issues > like DJ back panel style and flyleaf price. Sometimes, I think, > those factors help establish the validity of a first; sometimes > they cast doubt on it. Oh, I think you've hit the nail on the head here!!! We now have a solid idea of when prices changed, so those are good to use. We can use DJ backs as well; thanks to Ron Holl's efforts, these may become of better use in the future and it DOES make sense to add that info -- if it proves to be reliable -- as first edition points. In sum, here are some first edition points (some mentioned above, some not, with questions) that might be added to BookNotes for many titles: * DJ back -- Is this generally a reliable indicator, based on the dates of use as noted in ModernLib, especially for post-1963 issues that had no "available titles" count at the top of the DJ inverse? * Price on DJ flap -- Some DJ flaps don't show prices. Are there any firsts that lack the price? * ISBN numbers -- Can the presence of these be used as a negative indicator (no first DJs had ISBN numbers) as a search of the mailing list archives seems to indicate? * Presence or absence of back-of-book catalog? * Dating key -- Especially useful for books in the 1963 - 1967 time frame, after "available titles" count disappeared from DJ inverses and while back-of-book catalogs were still being updated? What do others think? ------------------------------------- From: modlib at alltel.net ((Ron Holl) Date: Tue Jul 3 15:20:11 2007 Yes to all of these! WRT ISBN, I believe that any presence of an ISBN = Not a first (except for the first edition of the Auden 2nd edition). This has been discussed in the list serv before. ron ------------------------------------- From: kamins at ModernLib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Tue Jul 3 15:29:12 2007 > WRT ISBN, I believe that any presence of an ISBN = Not a first > (except for the first edition of the Auden 2nd edition). This has > been discussed in the list serv before. Yes, but I'm not sure about that Auden. Are you suggesting that the 1st of the 2nd (Awk!) DID have an ISBN? Scot Kamins ------------------------------------- From: modlib at alltel.net ((Ron Holl) Date: Tue Jul 3 15:35:13 2007 An additional booknote for 332.1? This is one of the titles lacking FMLEd. The guide indicates a first dj of 415+, and the booknotes says 415. The Stalking page also indicates 415. However, there are two seasons with 415. I have just picked up a copy of this title, and can verify that the jacket is a 415 with a Fall 1962 list (thus, a 415 jacket with a Spring 1963 list is not a first jacket). I believe this should be indicated in the booknotes; true? Also, the list in the book (which contains only Giants) indicates Fall 1962 as well. ron ------------------------------------- From: modlib at alltel.net ((Ron Holl) Date: Tue Jul 3 15:39:16 2007 > Yes, but I'm not sure about that Auden. Are you suggesting that the > 1st of the 2nd (Awk!) DID have an ISBN? I do believe so. I can double check my copy at home in about an hour. I think it's about time to go home. When the request went out for an Auden w/o an ISBN there was no response. (July 2006) ron ------------------------------------- From: kamins at ModernLib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Tue Jul 3 15:59:43 2007 > I have just picked up a copy of this title [Stein, Selected > Writings), and can verify that the jacket is a 415 with a Fall 1962 > list (thus, a 415 jacket with a Spring 1963 list is not a first > jacket). I believe this should be indicated in the booknotes; > true? Also, the list in the book (which contains only Giants) > indicates Fall 1962 as well. So you're suggesting I add the following: The dust jacket for the first of this title is from the Fall of 1962 (shows Erasmus, In Praise of Folly, but not Hesse, Steppenwolf); the back-of-book catalog, also Fall of 1962 but showing only giants, lists Pasternak, Dr. Zhivago but not Medieval Epics. Yes? Scot Kamins ------------------------------------- From: modlib at alltel.net ((Ron Holl) Date: Tue Jul 3 17:13:05 2007 Well, yes, as long as you are not paying by the character. Also, my copy of Auden does have the ISBN. It is a good bet they all do. ------------------------------------- From: jwol at fast.net ((John Wolansky) Date: Tue Jul 3 17:42:43 2007 ... that states "Second Edition" on the title page, also has an ISBN. Scott, I agree with Ron regarding additional points for 1st. Aeschylus II, 311.1 is another with 1st ML Edition issues, having 415 on the DJ. I have two copies with 415, one with Hesse and one without. John Wolansky ------------------------------------- From: kamins at ModernLib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Tue Jul 3 17:44:09 2007 > Also, my copy of Auden does have the ISBN. It is a good bet they > all do. Mine does as well. A search of the archives confirms it. While we're on the subject of ISBNs, I show copies of DJ backs listed as pre-1971 that are evidently errors: Style Gj at http://www.modernlib.com/Identifiers/djBacksGiant/backsGiant.html Style O at http://www.modernlib.com/Identifiers/djBacksReg/backsReg.html I guess both of these are 1971 and beyond. Did both of these exist before 1971, just without the ISBN numbers? Scot Kamins ------------------------------------- From: goodbooks at webtv.net ((JOSEPH HILL) Date: Tue Jul 3 21:22:02 2007 I have no idea if this will help anyone or anything.... My copy of the Auden 2nd. edition: ISBN 394 60160-2 20 titles on back of DJ: First;Selected Poetry of W.H.Auden-160 Last:Nine Plays of Eugene O'Neill-G G55 ------------------------------------- From: kamins at ModernLib.com ((Scot Kamins) Date: Wed Jul 4 15:04:48 2007 Folks, Yesterday (or so) I published a list of possible items to be added to BookNotes. These items were to be used as help in identifying first editions. I started to add these to BookNotes today and immediately ran into problems. Here's each item and the problem I discovered with it. Does anybody have a solution for me? * DJ back -- useful for post-1963 issues that had no "available titles" count at the top of the DJ inverse. But how do we know which DJ back appeared on books from 1966, for example, when styles k, l, and m were all used? http://www.modernlib.com/Identifiers/djBacksReg/backsReg.html * Price on DJ flap -- Some DJ flaps don't show prices. Are there any firsts that lack the price? Which ones? And what of price- transitional years when there was one price in the Spring and another in the Fall? http://www.modernlib.com/General/pricesByDate.html * Presence or absence of back-of-book catalog -- which 1sts did NOT have them in the years 1933 - 1967? * Dating key -- Especially useful for books in the 1963 - 1967 time frame, after "available titles" count disappeared from DJ inverses and while back-of-book catalogs were still being updated -- but while we now know what year nearly every title appeared, we have no reliable list indicating whether the book appeared in the Spring or Fall As I'm fond of saying, I'm willing to spend all kinds of time adding >USEFUL & RELIABLE< material to ModernLib. As your hobby is collecting these books, my hobby is collecting & publishing INFORMATION about these books. But people have to help me figure out how to gather the info, and people have to send me info to publish. Scot Kamins -------------------------------------