From: owner-lds-bookshelf-digest@lists.xmission.com (lds-bookshelf-digest) To: lds-bookshelf-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: lds-bookshelf-digest V1 #949 Reply-To: lds-bookshelf Sender: owner-lds-bookshelf-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-lds-bookshelf-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk lds-bookshelf-digest Wednesday, November 27 2002 Volume 01 : Number 949 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 15:41:59 -0700 From: "Steve Eccles" Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] DAllas area It looks like I'm moving to Dallas in lthe next few weeks. Actually, I'm due back there on Monday and my wife will follow me sometime between Thanksgiving and New Year. We have our first grandchild on the way and she wants to stay back for that. My question is what are the good book sources in Dallas or Texas in general. I guess that could be expanded to include Oklahoma City and other areas that are commutable from Dallas for a weekend end excursion. Anyone have any suggestions? - --Steve - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 18:55:29 -0500 From: "zoot" Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] DAllas area As soon as you find them, Steve, let me know. I live in Houston. I will gladly pick up whatever items you find that are valuable, and let you look at them as they sit on my shelves. Dennis Nelson WELCOME TO TEXAS,Y'ALL!! - -----Original Message----- From: owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Steve Eccles Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 5:42 PM To: lds-bookshelf Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] DAllas area It looks like I'm moving to Dallas in lthe next few weeks. Actually, I'm due back there on Monday and my wife will follow me sometime between Thanksgiving and New Year. We have our first grandchild on the way and she wants to stay back for that. My question is what are the good book sources in Dallas or Texas in general. I guess that could be expanded to include Oklahoma City and other areas that are commutable from Dallas for a weekend end excursion. Anyone have any suggestions? - --Steve - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 19:35:46 -0700 From: "Keith Irwin" Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C27A02.3B0B8850 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 2nd printing. That they screwed up the numbers doesn't change the fact that it was a different print run. Or am I missing something? - -----Original Message----- From: owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of BJRom@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 4:27 PM To: lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question In the Mormon market, at least for newer books, the distinction between first and later printings is not always that important to most collectors. For example, the first printings for both Bagley's _Blood of the Prophets_ and Given's _By the Hand of Mormon_ have sold out at their respective publishers. Yet, I would be surprised if either first printing greatly exceeds the value of a second printing any time soon. On the other hand, in the modern fiction collectors' market, first printings are EVERYTHING. Of course, some ardent Mormon collectors also insist on first printings. In either case, I recently encountered a book that shows how very difficult identifying a first printing can be. A first novel _You Are Not a Stranger Here_ by Adam Haslett, a Yale Law School student, was recently nominated for the National Book Award and was chosen by last year's winner for the Today Show Book Club. As a result, the first printing was relatively small, but the next printing was huge. Unfortunately, the second printing looks like a first printing and could fool even the most astute observer, absent a comparison with the true first printing. In the first printing, the last 3 lines of the copyright page read: "August 2002 / FIRST PRINTING / 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2" The second printing deletes the first 2 of these lines, but keeps the last line intact, INCLUDING (unfortunately) the "1". Comparing the two, it is obvious which is the first printing, but alone, the second printing looks very much like a first. If you are interested, I have a copy of both pages on the following link: http://www.angelfire.com/ut2/psbooks/FIRST_PRINTING_copy1.JPG Now for my question---typically we use the word "state" to distinguish different copies of a book from the same printing. As I understand it, the concept is that the printing presses stopped and a correction was made. In this case, however, it is clear that the book I have called the "second state" is really a second printing. But to follow that designation would mean that when you look at the number line for later printings, you would have to always add one to the number to get it right. With this in mind, should the second book in this example be called a SECOND PRINTING or a SECOND STATE of the FIRST PRINTING? Trivial, I know, but such are the thoughts of the biblio-obsessed. Brian - ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C27A02.3B0B8850 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2nd = printing.  That they screwed up the numbers doesn’t change the fact that it = was a different print run.  Or am I missing something?

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of BJRom@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, October 20, = 2002 4:27 PM
To: = lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com
Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] = FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question

 

In the Mormon market, at = least for newer books, the distinction between first and later printings is not = always that important to most collectors.  For example, the first = printings for both Bagley's _Blood of the Prophets_ and Given's _By the Hand of = Mormon_ have sold out at their respective publishers. Yet, I would be surprised if = either first printing greatly exceeds the value of a second printing any time = soon. On the other hand, in the modern fiction collectors' market, first = printings are EVERYTHING. Of course, some ardent Mormon collectors also insist on = first printings.

In either case, I recently encountered a book that shows how very = difficult identifying a first printing can be. A first novel _You Are Not a Stranger  Here_ by Adam Haslett, a Yale Law School student, was = recently nominated for the National Book Award and was chosen by last year's = winner for the Today Show Book Club. As a result, the first printing was relatively = small, but the next printing was huge. Unfortunately, the second printing looks = like a first printing and could fool even the most astute observer, absent a comparison with the true first printing. In the first printing, the last = 3 lines of the copyright page read: "August 2002 / FIRST PRINTING / 1 3  5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2"  The second printing deletes the = first 2 of these lines, but keeps the last line intact, INCLUDING (unfortunately) = the "1". Comparing the two, it is obvious which is the first = printing, but alone, the second printing looks very much like a first. If you are = interested, I have a copy of both pages on the following link: http://www.angelfire.com/ut2/psbooks/FIRST_PRINTING_copy1.JPG

Now for my question---typically we use the word "state" to distinguish different copies  of a book from the same printing. As = I understand it, the concept is that the printing presses stopped and a correction was made. In this case, however, it is clear that the book I = have called the "second state" is really a second printing. But to = follow that designation would mean that when you look at the number line for = later printings, you would have to always add one to the number to get it = right. With this in mind, should the second book in this example be called a SECOND PRINTING or a SECOND STATE of the FIRST PRINTING? Trivial, I know, but = such are the thoughts of the biblio-obsessed.

Brian

- ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C27A02.3B0B8850-- - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 18:36:18 EDT From: BJRom@aol.com Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question - --part1_3a.2e3a6467.2ae87e62_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en Keith, No, I don't think you are missing anything. My question goes more to the=20 foundational issue of whether the distinction between states and printings=20 really has much meaning in the real world anymore. Obviously collectors=20 continue to use those terms to distinguish between books. But the methodolog= y=20 used in publishing and printing often make those distinctions academic, if=20 not archaic. In the modern world of publishing the whole concept of "print=20 run" is rather ambiguous. Frequently, a national publisher will use several=20 different printers to print the same book. Those print runs may happen=20 concurrently or staggered. Often, the designation of a second or later=20 printing is little more than an artificial publisher accounting procedure=20 based on profit projections and targets. For example, when a book hits=20 bestseller lists, the so-called "print-runs" often are set at some=20 predetermined quantity per printing, even though the presses don't really=20 stop between them (other than to remove the digit). In this electronic age,=20 changes to a book can be made "in the twinkling of an eye." As a result, it= =20 is sometimes hard, if not impossible, to distinguish between stopping the=20 presses to make a change and stopping the presses to start another printing.= =20 The only difference is whether the publisher decided to take another printin= g=20 number off of the copyright page at that moment. For the particular book I=20 mentioned, my understanding is that the publisher had preset a printing=20 quantity for the book's release. As that printing was proceeding (but not=20 finished), Good Morning America notified them that the book had been chosen=20 for its reading group. The publisher "stopped the presses" to put the GMA=20 logo on the dj and take the "FIRST EDITION" off of the copyright page. Of=20 course, the publisher did this intentionally. I seriously doubt the publishe= r=20 will suddenly delete both the 1 and the 2 before the next "printing." This=20 means that for all such books (and I am aware of 3 or 4 others currently in=20 release with this same situation), the printing number in the book will no=20 longer match the correct printing. Yet, if you ask the publisher which=20 printing the book is in, it will undoubtedly refer you to the number line. =20= I=20 believe this has happened recently because of all of the takeovers among=20 major publishers of different imprints, especially when Random House takes=20 over an imprint. They seem to combine their own "First Edition" practice=20 with the number line practice of the acquired imprint. I realize all of this= =20 is much ado about nothing, but then Keith has already called me a=20 "biblio-nerd," a designation I carry with pride! Brian In a message dated 10/22/2002 8:36:22 PM Mountain Daylight Time,=20 irwinkw@earthlink.net writes: > 2nd printing. That they screwed up the numbers doesn=E2=80=99t change the= fact that=20 > it was a different print run. Or am I missing something? >=20 >=20 - --part1_3a.2e3a6467.2ae87e62_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en Keith,

No, I don't think you are missing anything. My question goes more to the fou= ndational issue of whether the distinction between states and printings real= ly has much meaning in the real world anymore.  Obviously collectors co= ntinue to use those terms to distinguish between books. But the methodology=20= used in publishing and printing often make those distinctions academic, if n= ot archaic. In the modern world of publishing the whole concept of "print ru= n" is rather ambiguous. Frequently, a national publisher will use several di= fferent printers to print the same book. Those print runs may happen concurr= ently or staggered. Often, the designation of a second or later printing is=20= little more than an artificial publisher accounting procedure based on profi= t projections and targets. For example, when a book hits bestseller lists, t= he so-called "print-runs" often are set at some predetermined quantity per p= rinting, even though the presses don't really stop between them (other than=20= to remove the digit). In this electronic age, changes to a book can be made=20= "in the twinkling of an eye."  As a result, it is sometimes hard, if no= t impossible, to distinguish between stopping the presses to make a change a= nd stopping the presses to start another printing. The only difference is wh= ether the publisher decided to take another printing number off of the copyr= ight page at that moment. For the particular book I mentioned, my understand= ing is that the publisher had preset a printing quantity for the book's rele= ase. As that printing was proceeding (but not finished), Good Morning Americ= a notified them that the book had been chosen for its reading group.  T= he publisher "stopped the presses" to put the GMA logo on the dj and take th= e "FIRST EDITION" off of the copyright page. Of course, the publisher did th= is intentionally. I seriously doubt the publisher will suddenly delete both=20= the 1 and the 2 before the next "printing." This means that for all such boo= ks (and I am aware of 3 or 4 others currently in release with this same situ= ation), the printing number in the book will no longer match the correct pri= nting. Yet, if you ask the publisher which printing the book is in, it will=20= undoubtedly refer you to the number line.  I believe this has happened=20= recently because of all of the takeovers among major publishers of different= imprints, especially when Random House takes over an imprint.  They se= em to combine their own "First Edition" practice with the number line practi= ce of the acquired imprint. I realize all of this is much ado about nothing,= but then Keith has already called me a "biblio-nerd," a designation I carry= with pride!

Brian


In a message dated 10/22/2002 8:36:22 PM Mountain Daylight Time, irwinkw@ear= thlink.net writes:


2nd printing.  That they screwed up the numbers doesn= =E2=80=99t change the fact that it was a different print run.  Or am I=20= missing something?



 - --part1_3a.2e3a6467.2ae87e62_boundary-- - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:48:14 EDT From: RickBook@aol.com Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question In a message dated 10/23/02 6:37:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, BJRom@aol.com writes: << . . . the methodology used in publishing and printing often make those distinctions academic, if not archaic. In the modern world of publishing the whole concept of "print run" is rather ambiguous. . . . it is sometimes hard, if not impossible, to distinguish between stopping the presses to make a change and stopping the presses to start another printing. The only difference is whether the publisher decided to take another printing number off of the copyright page at that moment. >> In the end, I hope that the thing which distinguishes book collecting from numismatics or philately, baseball card collecting, and the like - is content. When I see an expensive leather binding slapped on a large-run trade book printed by normal mechanics on ordinary paper, I can only ask, "Why?, why!, why?" The concept of limited editions and extra-good bindings should lie, at the heart of the motivation, in the difficulty and quality of production, such as fine hand-press work, or extraordinarily high-quality hand-made paper (thus limiting the number of copies which could be produced, and the importance of housing and preserving the text-block in a superlative manner, as with the Kelmscott Chaucer or the Doves Bible). If we worry about things which do not apply to a particular book's station in life, it becomes artificial, in my mind. As Brian suggests, such an artificiality may apply to our efforts to hold onto anachronistic terms and concepts with modern, simultaneous, mish-mash printings. A collector of first-edition fiction from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries naturally wants the first, first, first (First edition, first issue, first state). An old history book may also be so identified and preferred, yet to magnify the purpose for which such a book was written and produced, it presumably got better with each change and correction, so that the serious collector may care more for its third than its first edition. There is nothing sacred about "FIRST." But there is everything sacred about "BEST." And so with modern productions, there may also be a separate category of criteria. Try this: If the print run is so large and so technological that there is no way accurately to establish absolute first issue and state, then how can it ever be rare enough for such a distinction to matter anyway? Rather like the mass-produced stamp rarities produced and offered by our Post Office all year long? Can we really get excited to own one of the first 3,000 out of 20,000 printed? Just rambling! There is no right or wrong on such a subject, only preferences, and I have suggested mine. Rick - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:28:59 -0500 From: "Edlund, Mark J" Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question Rick, Your comments are well taken. I have another question to further muddy the waters. You mention "an expensive leather binding slapped on a large-run trade book printed by normal mechanics on ordinary paper". Should this even be classified as "limited edition", or is it not even another edition, but rather a binding variant? i have also heard that sometimes when making these "limited editions" whoever is producing them strips off the old binding and then puts on the new leather binding. Should such a book then be described as "re-bound"? Mark - -----Original Message----- From: RickBook@aol.com To: lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com Sent: 10/23/2002 7:48 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question In a message dated 10/23/02 6:37:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, BJRom@aol.com writes: << . . . the methodology used in publishing and printing often make those distinctions academic, if not archaic. In the modern world of publishing the whole concept of "print run" is rather ambiguous. . . . it is sometimes hard, if not impossible, to distinguish between stopping the presses to make a change and stopping the presses to start another printing. The only difference is whether the publisher decided to take another printing number off of the copyright page at that moment. >> In the end, I hope that the thing which distinguishes book collecting from numismatics or philately, baseball card collecting, and the like - is content. When I see an expensive leather binding slapped on a large-run trade book printed by normal mechanics on ordinary paper, I can only ask, "Why?, why!, why?" The concept of limited editions and extra-good bindings should lie, at the heart of the motivation, in the difficulty and quality of production, such as fine hand-press work, or extraordinarily high-quality hand-made paper (thus limiting the number of copies which could be produced, and the importance of housing and preserving the text-block in a superlative manner, as with the Kelmscott Chaucer or the Doves Bible). If we worry about things which do not apply to a particular book's station in life, it becomes artificial, in my mind. As Brian suggests, such an artificiality may apply to our efforts to hold onto anachronistic terms and concepts with modern, simultaneous, mish-mash printings. A collector of first-edition fiction from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries naturally wants the first, first, first (First edition, first issue, first state). An old history book may also be so identified and preferred, yet to magnify the purpose for which such a book was written and produced, it presumably got better with each change and correction, so that the serious collector may care more for its third than its first edition. There is nothing sacred about "FIRST." But there is everything sacred about "BEST." And so with modern productions, there may also be a separate category of criteria. Try this: If the print run is so large and so technological that there is no way accurately to establish absolute first issue and state, then how can it ever be rare enough for such a distinction to matter anyway? Rather like the mass-produced stamp rarities produced and offered by our Post Office all year long? Can we really get excited to own one of the first 3,000 out of 20,000 printed? Just rambling! There is no right or wrong on such a subject, only preferences, and I have suggested mine. Rick - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:32:28 -0700 From: "Keith Irwin" Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C27BA4.DD968F40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian My alternate e-mail address is biblionerd@yahoo.com. So I'm not only a biblionerd, but a yahoo as well. Keith - -----Original Message----- From: owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of BJRom@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:36 PM To: lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question .. I realize all of this is much ado about nothing, but then Keith has already called me a "biblio-nerd," a designation I carry with pride! Brian - ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C27BA4.DD968F40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Brian

 

My alternate e-mail address is biblionerd@yahoo.com.  So = I’m not only a biblionerd, but a yahoo as well.

 

Keith

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of BJRom@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, October = 23, 2002 2:36 PM
To: lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: = [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question

 

…. I realize all of this is much ado about nothing, but then Keith has = already called me a "biblio-nerd," a designation I carry with = pride!

Brian



- ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C27BA4.DD968F40-- - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:34:56 -0700 From: "Keith Irwin" Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] FW: submission from ["Hugh Stocks" ] From Hugh Stocks: Sorry to bother the serious readers hereon, but I seem to have mislaid the First Hugh's current email address. As some/all of you may be aware, I have recently (a week ago, actually) relocated to the hills of Northern Kentucky. Well, actually, to the Kentucky suburbs of Cincinnati, OH, but it amoounts to the same thing. So -- First, I need to have my email address redirected for the voluminous conversations of the bookshelf list. I am now virtually located at hstocks@fuse.net. Second, I'm interested in recommendations for antiquarian, rare or good used book stores in the Cincinnati region. I doubt there are any in Northern Kentucky, since I can't find even a Barnes and Noble anywhere near. Third, we now have a usable, attractive guest room in our new home and traveling booknerds are cordially invited to occupy it at need or desire. We're only about 20 minutes from the Cincinnati airport (which, of course, is in Kentucky --- as is the Cincinnati Stake center and the Cincinnati Mission home). And now, back to the questions of statefulness and the value of leather bindings.... Hugh the Peripatetic - -- Hugh Stocks hstocks@fuse.net - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:12:09 EDT From: RickBook@aol.com Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question In a message dated 10/24/02 2:29:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, EdlundMarkJ@uams.edu writes: << I have another question to further muddy the waters. You mention "an expensive leather binding slapped on a large-run trade book printed by normal mechanics on ordinary paper". Should this even be classified as "limited edition", or is it not even another edition, but rather a binding variant? i have also heard that sometimes when making these "limited editions" whoever is producing them strips off the old binding and then puts on the new leather binding. Should such a book then be described as "re-bound"? >> To my way of thinking, certainly, that is all that these are. It is understandable that an excited new author might have his or her binder put a few copies in a nice binding for family and friends, and I would call those "privately rebound as presentation copies." Rick - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 08:41:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Cahoon Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] DAllas area Good for you Steve. I recently spent 4 years with my family in Dallas (Plano). I finally had to move back because I missed mountains and seasons. :^) There is a used bookstore in Denton (north west of Dallas) that I found a few items. There is also Half-Price bookstores all over the Metro-Plex - but the finds there were few and far between. Just a couple of blocks north of the temple there is/was a Moon's bookstore that changed to a Seagull and when I left a couple of years ago it was back to being a Moon's. They had some nice finds - but were a little pricey. Don't forget to head to SMU and see the Book of Commandments they have there! Good Luck! - --Doug > > -----Original Message----- > > It looks like I'm moving to Dallas in lthe next few > weeks. Actually, I'm > due > back there on Monday and my wife will follow me > sometime between > Thanksgiving and New Year. We have our first > grandchild on the way and > she > wants to stay back for that. > > My question is what are the good book sources in > Dallas or Texas in > general. > I guess that could be expanded to include Oklahoma > City and other areas > that > are commutable from Dallas for a weekend end > excursion. > > Anyone have any suggestions? > > --Steve > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:46:02 -0600 From: "Edlund, Mark J" Subject: RE: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question What has surprised me recently is the sheer number of titles that are in done a limited edition. Buying all of these limited editions can be a surprisingly expensive proposition. Here are some titles of this genre that have appeared this year, or will appear shortly: 1) Church employee gift. I would guess you can get one for $50 to $100. 2) Some titles by Greg Kofford Books a. Lucy Mack Smith bio of Joseph Smith. $160. b. "Penny Tracts and Polemics". $160 c. Bio of Hugh Nibley. $160 d. "People and Power of Nauvoo". $160 e. "A House for the Most High: The Story of the Original Nauvoo Temple". $160 3) Signature Books version of Quinn's J. Reuben Clark book. This was not bound, but rather produced in a clamshell case. I believe some were sold by Signature for about $250. 4) Benchmark Book's edition of the Godell (sic?) book. I think this was $300. 5) Benchmark Book's edition of Blood of the Prophets. $400. 6) Arthur H. Clark's newest volume in the Kingdom in the West Series is supposed to be out in the next few weeks. $150. To buy these books would be around $2100, including tax. Perhaps Deseret Book, Grandin, Greg Kofford Books, Signature, or someone else has done some that I have missed. I would be interested if anyone knows of others. Mark Edlund -----Original Message----- From: RickBook@aol.com [mailto:RickBook@aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 11:12 AM To: lds-bookshelf@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [LDS-Bookshelf] FIRST PRINTINGS--Comments and a Question In a message dated 10/24/02 2:29:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, EdlundMarkJ@uams.edu writes: << I have another question to further muddy the waters. You mention "an expensive leather binding slapped on a large-run trade book printed by normal mechanics on ordinary paper". Should this even be classified as "limited edition", or is it not even another edition, but rather a binding variant? i have also heard that sometimes when making these "limited editions" whoever is producing them strips off the old binding and then puts on the new leather binding. Should such a book then be described as "re-bound"? >> To my way of thinking, certainly, that is all that these are. It is understandable that an excited new author might have his or her binder put a few copies in a nice binding for family and friends, and I would call those "privately rebound as presentation copies." Rick - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 07:43:33 -0800 From: "Steve Eccles" Subject: [LDS-Bookshelf] Quinn Review This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C295E8.AFF3B190 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Prince has a very interesting review of Quinn's new Clark biography in the Journal of Mormon History that just arrived. He took issue with several things in the review. Anyone have any comments on this? - --Steve - ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C295E8.AFF3B190 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greg Prince has a very interesting review of = Quinn’s new Clark biography in the Journal = of Mormon History that just arrived. He took issue with several things in the = review. Anyone have any comments on this?

 

--Steve

- ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C295E8.AFF3B190-- - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - LDS-Bookshelf, information and discussion of LDS books - - To unsubscribe, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with - - "unsubscribe lds-bookshelf" (without quotes) in the message body. - - For assistance, mail to "lds-bookshelf-owner@lists.xmission.com" ------------------------------ End of lds-bookshelf-digest V1 #949 ***********************************