|
"The road to truth is paved with bricks of falsehood."
If you've been in the book business long, you've probably banged your head against this question more times than you'd like to remember: "How can I tell if a book is a first edition?" In an ideal world we could simply clear our throats, peer learnedly over the tops of our eyeglasses, and declare, "Turn to the copyright page and look for the words "First Edition,"" but the truth is that first edition identification is one of the more complex and precarious activities booksellers can undertake.
Worse, and all too frequently, the process of identification isn't so much one of uncovering clues that once and for all ID a book as a first edition as it is one of eliminating any of a number of possibilities that would indicate a later edition - that is, only by following the innumerable bricks of falsehood are we finally led to the truth. If then. Of course, much detective work proceeds exactly this way. It was Sherlock Holmes himself who said, "Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth."
Worse yet, the question itself is flawed, or at least imprecise. Simply asking if a book is a first edition might not be enough. There may exist various printings or issue states of the first edition. Collectibility and, in turn, value might depend critically on which state of the first edition is at hand.
Fortunately, the question can be answered, but not cleanly, not quickly and in some cases not even definitively. In the coming months we will approach the answer from several directions, beginning today by discussing why first edition identification is important at all. For reference, we've included the Bookologist's Ladder of Values - a list of 12 common formats a book may appear in, ordered according to typical relative value (with the usual disclaimer of exceptions). In upcoming issues we'll get much more specific.
The most useful information, ultimately, is the most specific, and only by looking at individual publishers and their practices can we arrive at anything resembling a final answer. This is where we hope to offer the most assistance to you.
Announcement:
The Bookologist has begun construction of a large resource for first edition identification. This will be the first of its kind online, more comprehensive than any reference book currently in print, and, if things go according to plan, will be completed in the next few months. The first installment - publishers beginning with the letter "A" - will be put into place today and will consist of detailed information on first edition designations for over 450 different publishers beginning with this letter. http://www.bookologist.com/cab/pages/firsteds
Once all A-Z publishers are in place, a resource for determining issue states will follow. As with all other resources we offer, your corrections to existing material and suggestions for additions to it are most welcome, perhaps particularly welcome in this area. We don't know it all; nor can we.
In today's issue we're pleased to feature an article by one of our new writers, Tim Doyle of Bayside Books. Tim has parlayed an interest in collecting signed books into a profitable business by converting otherwise average inventory into significantly more valuable signed editions. In the first article of his two-part series, Tim shares his expertise on, among other things, researching dates and locations of book signings and discusses what to expect (and do) once you're there.
Also, our ongoing course in basic book anatomy continues in today's Bookologist with an examination of spines, the backbones of books. As in human anatomy, book spines often develop problems with age. Cocked spines, rolled spines, spine lean, spine slant, spine twist - we'll try to hack our way through this jungle of analogous terms and emerge into a figurative clearing. Fast on the heels of this discussion, the Bookologist's Book Repair Department presents some suggestions for restoring spines to square that have deformed over time. Yes, get those clamps ready once again.
Finally, the results of our Bookologist advertising poll are in. You, our readers - without a single exception - told us that you preferred the present format of free subscriptions and pertinent advertising. Moreover, several of you mentioned that (we're not making this up) you liked the ads, others that you liked the ads and clicked the links, and still others that you liked the ads, clicked the links, and purchased products and services. Well, in the spirit of refusing to fix things that aren't broken, we'll continue to march onward and upward, arm in arm, with our advertisers. Thanks for participating in this!
|
