[Table of Contents] [Search]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Second edition or second printing

At 03:55 PM 1/29/2006, you wrote: 
Completist collectors, of which I am one, are generally willing to pay more
for a first edition than for a similar copy of a later edition,


"Completist" means that one wants every issue of every printing of
every edition of an/the author(s) that one collects.

even if the
later edition or printing is demonstrably rarer.


For what I'm calling "a collector" money has nothing to do with
anything, except insofar as the question of whether or not one has
the money to pay for what one wants/needs is concerned.

Collectors outside of modern firsts (and I would include Newton as a modern
author),


The term "modern first" refers to fiction; while some would argue
that mny of AEN's bibliographic insights are no more than that, he is
regarded by most as, at least primarily, a write of
non-fiction...which means that his works are not "modern firsts."

Dave

routinely pay more for first editions even if there is a better
second edition. There are exceptions, particularly when additional maps or
illustrations were added to the later editions, or when the printer of the
later edition is well known or revered, or where it was the first book
printed in a particular place. But in those cases, it isn't the later
edition per se that is valuable, it's the fact that it's a first of some
other sort that drives interest. A survey of printed bibles would illustrate
this point better than just about any other book.

Respectfully,

Scott Brown
**********************************
P. Scott Brown, Editor
Fine Books & Collections magazine

PO Box 106
Eureka, CA 95502
tel. 707.443.9562
fax. 707.443.9572
http://www.finebooksmagazine.com
**********************************




-----Original Message-----
From: Exlibris [mailto:EXLIBRIS@MAIL.ECW.NAME]On Behalf Of David
Klappholz
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 12:04 PM
To: EXLIBRIS@MAIL.ECW.NAME
Subject: Re: [EXLIBRIS] Second edition or second printing


At 02:23 PM 1/29/2006, you wrote:
>...Book
>collectors tend only to focus on the first printing of the first edition,

That may apply to collectors of modern firsts, but it hardly applies
to many other types of collector, e.g., me, who, among other things,
is a completist collector of A. Edward Newton; I'm certainly
interested in first issues of first printings of first editions, but
I ultimately want to have: (i) at least one (good association) copy
of every issue of every printing of every edition of every book by
AEN, (ii) a copy of every piece of ephemera relating to AEN, (iii) a
copy of every variant of every title published by AEN in the late
1880's and early 1890's, when he published typical (Victorian) gift
books, before he made the fortune that enabled him to put together a
rather impressive collection of English literature, and (iv) as much
correspondence and ms. material as I can get my hands on -- and can
afford to buy.

In the past few weeks I've even bought a printed (chocolates) box of
the candy company that AEN owned for a short time as well as a
(50lbs. or so) piece of 1904 electrical equipment manufactured by the
company in which he made his fortune. In the past I've bought printed
material relating to the coffee shop business -- originated at the
U.S. Centennial Exposition -- which AEN inherited from his
father-in-law, also an early Grolier Club member and reasonably
prominent collector, when the latter died in 1900.

So, even though it gives me a kick to find and identify a previously
undocumented variant of a book, a pamphlet, or an ephemeral piece,
the idea of basing my collecting on bibliographic details or
accidents would be incredibly boring.

Regards
Dave

PS...and I'm very interested in (deprecated below) periodicals with
appearances of and/or references to AEN ... and ASWR, and ... and
have even "collected/befriended" AEN's four granddaughters.

>but they care about things like the binding, dust jacket, and illustrations
>that bibliographers often give less weight to. Different publishers use the
>term edition to mean different things and are under no compunction to be
>consistent. But then book collectors and bibliographers borrowed the term
>from printers and publishers so we can't really complain about them using
it
>incorrectly.
>
>Joel also points out all the things that we don't consider first editions -
>periodical appearances, proofs, etc.
>
>I adapted Joel's article to replace the Wikipedia definition of first
>edition. I would encourage those of you who are particularly interested in
>this subject to add to our start:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_edition
>
>Just hit the Edit This Page button at the top of your screen and revise
>away. As the founders of Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia written by its
>readers, say, Be bold.
>
>Scott Brown
>**********************************
>P. Scott Brown, Editor
>Fine Books & Collections magazine
>
>PO Box 106
>Eureka, CA 95502
>tel. 707.443.9562
>fax. 707.443.9572
>http://www.finebooksmagazine.com
>**********************************

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]

[CoOL]