Thread Name: 1920's Buckrams From: jpetersonlhi at frontier.com (john peterson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:34:11 -0500 I recently found and bought one of the Buckram editions from the late 1920?s, and I?m curious about just how many titles were bound in this way. The bindings are in a #4 binding style, but they are anything but flexible, with a coarse cloth cover over stiff boards. While the four examples that I own have faded spines, they are in otherwise great shape. The four titles that I have are: 101.2 American Poetry 1671-1928 (Stated First, 1929, with a Fall 1928 list in back) 003.2 Cellini, Autobiography (Fall, 1928 List) 138.1 Merejkowski, Romance of Da Vinci (Fall, 1928 List, also handwritten note from first owner that it was purchased 9/18/29) 132.1 Schreiner, Story of an African Farm (No List) I haven?t been able to find out much about these books. The first three I bought from Henry Toledano when he sold his collection, and I just found the Schreiner several weeks ago. The fact that the American Poetry example has the marks of a first printing makes me wonder if these aren?t just another variation of the 1929 transitional bindings, rather than a ML strategic marketing move. John Peterson ------------------------------------- From: brianlemasters at gmail.com (Brian LeMasters) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:21:14 -0600 John and fellow collectors, I also have a few of these bindings (11). More evidence to discuss is the Bernhard endpapers vs blank endpapers and the lack of a reinforcement strip of some kind. It would be educational to see a deconstructed 20's buckram, but I will not volunteer any of mine. My binding experience is limited to internet videos, but Bernhard endpapers and no additional step to insert the strips after the first signature suggests the normal binding process. Is there advertising or catalog listings or any publishing info from 1928 to introduce these bindings? Can transitional bindings be traced to one bindery and records be located? All of the ones I have are listed on the Buckram's Seen page on the website. Brian ------------------------------------- From: jpetersonlhi at frontier.com (john peterson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:29:48 -0500 Thanks for your response, Brian. All of mine have the Bernhard Endpapers, and all seem to have cloth reinforcement strips under the EPs that bridge the cover and book. I don?t have any idea about answers to your questions, but I?ll keep my eye out for a damaged early Buckram for autopsy purposes. John P. P.S. I love the picture of your ML Buckram collection on Scot?s website. To me, they look more impressive than the regulars with DJs. ------------------------------------- From: johnwolansky at verizon.net (John Wolansky) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:23:46 -0500 Gentlemen, I just checked two Everyman?s Library buckram bindings from the 1920?s. Neither one has reinforcing strips, either. How common are reinforcing strips, generally? I have no recollection of seeing them on books other than the later ML buckrams. So, I am not convinced that the lack of reinforcing strips on the 20?s library bindings discounts them as having been designed for library use. Also, the greater heft of the EL buckrams is as obvious as it is in the ML 1920?s buckrams. I wondered where the initial designation of the heavier bound 1920?s as Buckrams for library use originated. So, I checked Toledano. On page 184 I found the following: ?A few buckram Modern Library were published in the late twenties. All are hard to find, especially in fine condition.? Ideally, someone can locate sales offerings from the period describing them for library use. Short of that, I am not going to second guess Henry and view these volumes as manufactured for library use and not a transitional binding. Perhaps some of the EL cross-collectors can add information. The ML was conceived to model EL, I believe, so could the ML library bindings be copied as well? JWOL ------------------------------------- From: jbkrygier at owu.edu (John Krygier) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 07:16:37 -0500 A few of the EL 1920s-30s library bindings are illustrated on this page (just a bit down from the top) of the EL Collecting site: http://www.everymanslibrarycollecting.com/bindings.html <http://www.everymanslibrarycollecting.com/bindings.html > They came with jackets, and those are illustrated about 1/4 of the way down on this page: http://www.everymanslibrarycollecting.com/jackets.html The bindings are very sturdy. I have one copy that indicates ?Special Library Binding? on the dust jacket. I have not seen a alleged early ML library binding in person so difficult to compare! If Terry S. is lurking here he may have more to say. John K. ------------------------------------- From: tseymour at ptd.net (Terry Seymour) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:19:11 -0500 Of course I'm lurking. But since I have not seen an ML library binding I can't contribute much. I will say that the EML library bindings were very successful, far beyond what the inventors had foreseen. The original thought was that libraries would buy these sturdier volumes. In fact, they became very popular with readers because they were so much easier to handle. I suspect most libraries did NOT buy these bindings, preferring the cheaper cloth version. When I want to read an EML volume I always pull down a library binding, knowing that no harm will come to it. Terry ------------------------------------- From: brianlemasters at gmail.com (Brian LeMasters) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:30:49 -0600 Good Morning, all, Please examine the attached photo for a treatment of Ibsen. On the left, Wild Duck and Other Plays, ML 307.1, no date - about 1964. A Modern Library "Regular Buckram" binding, style B1. In the Middle, Peer Gynt, EL 747, 1934 printing. An Everyman's Library "Later Library" Binding in wrapper. On the right, Plays, ML 6.1, Fall 1928 printing. A Modern Library "20's Buckram" binding. By comparison to other library bindings, I would say the "20's Buckram" is properly identified as a binding meant for library use. I wonder if bookstores during the 20's displayed MLs and ELs near to each other? Which would you choose? Best, Brian https://thuban.owu.edu/pipermail/modlib/attachments/20151124/4600fa14/attachment-0002.jpg https://thuban.owu.edu/pipermail/modlib/attachments/20151124/4600fa14/attachment-0003.jpg ------------------------------------- From: jbkrygier at owu.edu (John Krygier) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:24:39 -0500 It makes sense that the ML issued the buckram bindings due to the popularity of the ELs in buckram, as Terry noted. Dutton would have been selling those in the US. As for ELs and MLs in 1920s bookstores: keep in mind that the EL had significantly more classical and traditional literature, philosophy, science, etc. and the ML had much more ?modern? literature. There is some overlap, but not as much as one might think. Thus you may not have the choice between the same title in both series in a store in 1920 - but instead different titles, uniquely offered by either series. John K. -------------------------------------