Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Fredrick/McBride - Women Among the Inklings

Expand Messages
  • Jason Fisher
    Wayne wrote:   ...   Yes, however, I am sad to report that the newer printings also appear to be (in Carl s words, of his and Verlyn s collection) a
    Message 1 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Wayne wrote:
       
      > Although Oak Knoll Press does have short print runs, it has
      > always had the _Bibliography_ in stock, and currently sells
      > it at www.oakknoll. com for $94.
       
      Yes, however, I am sad to report that the newer printings also appear to be (in Carl's words, of his and Verlyn's collection) "a _scanned_, and noticeably reduced-quality, reproduction of the _printed_ text." It's also physically smaller than the first edition and printed on lighter paper (it almost puts one in mind of a book club edition). I had a borrowed first-edition copy from the library at the same time the copy I bought arrived, so I was able to compare them side by side.* In fact, Jeremy and I discussed this very issue back in January 2008, and he concurred that it appeared to be photo-reproduced. I'm sorry to learn that Greenwood did it too (but happy that my copy of "Tolkien's Legendarium" is the better-quality first edition, sewn signatures and all).
       
      Jason

      * Let me hasten to note that none of these book-making defects render the *contents* of these books any less valuable. It's just a shame to see publishers cutting corners on books already priced so high.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Wayne G. Hammond
      ... I haven t seen a copy of the latest (third) printing, and am sorry to hear this. I do have a copy of the second printing, which was almost identical to the
      Message 2 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Jason wrote:

        >Yes, however, I am sad to report that the newer printings also appear to
        >be (in Carl's words, of his and Verlyn's collection) "a _scanned_, and
        >noticeably reduced-quality, reproduction of the _printed_ text." It's also
        >physically smaller than the first edition and printed on lighter paper (it
        >almost puts one in mind of a book club edition). I had a borrowed
        >first-edition copy from the library at the same time the copy I bought
        >arrived, so I was able to compare them side by side. In fact, Jeremy and I
        >discussed this very issue back in January 2008, and he concurred that it
        >appeared to be photo-reproduced.

        I haven't seen a copy of the latest (third) printing, and am sorry to hear
        this. I do have a copy of the second printing, which was almost identical
        to the first in manufacture except that the British Library came on as U.K.
        co-publisher (Oak Knoll by then having absorbed St Paul's Bibliographies).
        The third printing was meant only as a stop-gap, however, until I can
        finish a second edition.

        Wayne


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Jeremy Edmonds
        ... Hi Wayne, I had a few questions for you - if you seeing a copy of the latest impression from Oak Knoll will help, drop me a note and I can mail you a
        Message 3 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Wayne wrote:

          > I haven't seen a copy of the latest (third) printing, and am sorry to
          > hear this. I do have a copy of the second printing, which was almost
          > identical to the first in manufacture except that the British Library
          > came on as U.K. co-publisher (Oak Knoll by then having absorbed St
          > Paul's Bibliographies). The third printing was meant only as a stop-gap,
          > however, until I can finish a second edition.

          Hi Wayne,

          I had a few questions for you - if you seeing a copy of the latest impression from Oak Knoll will help, drop me a note and I can mail you a loaner at any time for you to see.

          I have a US copy from 1993 that lists St Pauls as "first published by" - was there a separate British edition prior to the 1st Oak Knoll edition? Is it distinguishable from the Oak Knoll edition?

          The latest copies I have from Oak Knoll (I received them about a month ago) say "First edition, second printing, 2002" and mention the British Library instead of St Pauls. Is this what you are calling the third printing (because St Pauls UK was technically the first?) Or did they not change the plates when they scanned the book, so your second printing and my "second printing" are really different? I do agree completely with Jason's analysis of the "new" second printings/third printings, which are easily noticeable.

          Jeremy
        • Andrew
          I contacted both authors, and neither had a copy to part with. Good thing to let bad scholarship die quietly, maybe? Still, I d love a copy. Ugh.
          Message 4 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            I contacted both authors, and neither had a copy to part with. Good
            thing to let bad scholarship die quietly, maybe?

            Still, I'd love a copy. Ugh.
          • Edith Crowe
            Apparently that is what happened. Makes me glad I retired from the library biz when I did--making my inadequate budget stretch far enough was impossible in
            Message 5 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Apparently that is what happened. Makes me glad I retired from the library
              biz when I did--making my inadequate budget stretch far enough was
              impossible in 2007; much worse now.

              Edith
              On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@...>wrote:

              > I suspect the price really was $59 when the book was first published.
              > But now that it's gone to print on demand, they've raised the price.
              > At least, that's what happened to _Tolkien's Legendarium_.
              >
              > On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:18 PM, Edith Crowe wrote:
              >
              > > I am chagrined to report that the erroneous price of $59 was indeed
              > > published with our *Mythprint* review. Our bad. Looks like it's
              > > still in
              > > print from Greenwood--I guess your customer doesn't want to pay the
              > > $100+
              > > that Greenwood is charging...
              >
              >



              --
              Edith Crowe, Corresponding Secretary
              The Mythopoeic Society
              http://www.mythsoc.org | correspondence@...


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Jeremy Edmonds
              Just to close out some parts of this thread, Greenwood (owned by ABC-Clio now) confirmed with me on the phone that this title is now Print-On-Demand, thus the
              Message 6 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Just to close out some parts of this thread, Greenwood (owned by ABC-Clio now) confirmed with me on the phone that this title is now Print-On-Demand, thus the price increase. For those so inclined to go this route, the publisher's price is $106.95 plus shipping and tax (my shipping estimate was $11 plus California tax brought the total to about $125).

                http://www.greenwood.com/catalog/GM1245.aspx

                No, I haven't ordered a copy yet.

                Thanks again for all the help and lively discussion! And as a side note, I would love to see a second edition of _Legendarium_, and a second edition of the _Bibliography_.

                Jeremy
              • Jason Fisher
                ...   *Thus* the price increase? I thought POD was supposed to cost less, not more. Any number of POD shops I might name could produce the volume for a
                Message 7 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Jeremy Edmonds wrote:
                  > Greenwood [...] confirmed with me on the phone that this title is
                  > now Print-On-Demand, thus the price increase.
                   
                  *Thus* the price increase? I thought POD was supposed to cost less, not more. Any number of POD shops I might name could produce the volume for a quarter, perhaps even a fifth the price they are asking. This doesn't make any sense to me.
                   
                  Jason

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Jeremy Edmonds
                  ... Can t agree with you more - Lulu.com says a book like this would cost approx $22 for a single copy order. I think the logic goes something like this
                  Message 8 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Jason Fisher said:
                    > *Thus* the price increase? I thought POD was supposed to cost less, not
                    > more. Any number of POD shops I might name could produce the volume for a
                    > quarter, perhaps even a fifth the price they are asking. This doesn't make
                    > any sense to me.

                    Can't agree with you more - Lulu.com says a book like this would cost approx $22 for a single copy order. I think the logic goes something like "this allows us to technically keep the book in print so we don't lose rights to it, but makes it inconvenient enough that no-one will bother to actually order a copy." Or something like that.
                  • Wayne G. Hammond
                    Jeremy, ... All copies of the first printing have the dual imprint St Paul s Bibliographies and Oak Knoll Press. St Paul s was primary, with Oak Knoll
                    Message 9 of 23 , Feb 19, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Jeremy,

                      >I have a US copy from 1993 that lists St Pauls as "first published by" -
                      >was there a separate British edition prior to the 1st Oak Knoll edition?
                      >Is it distinguishable from the Oak Knoll edition?

                      All copies of the first printing have the dual imprint St Paul's
                      Bibliographies and Oak Knoll Press. St Paul's was primary, with Oak Knoll
                      co-publishing in the U.S. Oak Knoll later absorbed St Paul's -- in fact,
                      for my Arthur Ransome bibliography (2000) I signed the contract with St
                      Paul's but completed production with Oak Knoll. The second printing of the
                      Tolkien Bibliography has the dual imprint Oak Knoll Press and British
                      Library, and the "second printing" notice you cite. The copy sent me at the
                      time is printed by ordinary offset, with no reduction in quality, on a more
                      cream-colored paper and with a little heavier inking (an improvement),
                      though is more tightly bound (not an improvement) in a similar blue cloth
                      with similar silver stamping. If you have a recent copy still with "second
                      printing", then Oak Knoll must have run off more copies photographically
                      without changing the copyright page information. I count a third printing
                      because Oak Knoll told me they were going back to press pending a second
                      edition, since the book continues to sell (if slowly).

                      Wayne



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.