<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Here is a typical signing/paging of the examples I have in front of
me:<br>
<br>
8vo, 8 leaves in the gathering, $5 signed:<br>
<br>
Leaf 1: unsigned, unpaginated, recto blank, verso full-page
engraving (frontispiece)<br>
Leaf 2: unsigned, unpaginated, recto title page, verso blank<br>
Leaf 3: signed A2, paginated [3]-4, recto begins text<br>
Leaf 4: signed A3, paginated 5-6<br>
Leaf 5: signed A4, paginated 7-8<br>
Leaf 6: signed A5, paginated 9-10<br>
Leaf 7: unsigned, paginated 11-12<br>
Leaf 8: unsigned, paginated 13-14<br>
Leaf 9: signed B, paginated 15-16 ... [etc.]<br>
<br>
I have another example that is the same as above, except that Leaf
9, signed B, is paginated 17 (i.e. 15-16 are skipped in the
numbering), clearly indicating that the frontispiece is indeed
printed on Leaf 8 of gathering A and is not a plate.<br>
<br>
I can see how the above could be given, as Richard originally
suggested, as pi^2 A^6 ... but, then would you also say that A1-4
are "missigned" A2-5?<br>
<br>
Randy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 9/9/2010 1:48 PM, John Lancaster wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:18A0A83A-0D96-48B9-9516-EA3C366658F8@me.com"
type="cite">Yes, very much a sideshow (and possibly only
theoretical) - I guess I prefer having to think about it - clearly
A is being reserved for the first gathering - but in the printer's
terms, that's all eight leaves, one sheet, even though he of
course knows how the book is supposed to end up. Since we can't
use A for all the leaves, it feels awkward to me to use it for
just one of the two resulting gatherings, even if one of them
includes the title leaf.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I do agree that chi should come after [A], if it's inferred.
Bowers has an amusing sequence of possible examples for a
slightly different situation: [A]^2 *^4 [B]^4 C-... ("somewhat
irregular"); pi^2 *^4 2pi^4 C-... ("more conservative"); pi^2
*^4 [2*]^4 C-... ("clearer").<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'd still be interested in knowing what the signing and
paging of the actual examples are, and further whether these 8
leaves are in fact preliminaries (textually speaking).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John Lancaster</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On Sep 9, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Noble, Richard wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite"><font size="4"><font
face="garamond,serif">The question is a bit of a
sideshow here, but anyway--I read Bowers as thinking
that the English habit of starting the text with B was
in order to reserve A for the title gathering, which
at least felt like a reason for inferring the initial
gathering as "[A]", instead of leaving the question
unsettled and having to think about it every time. I
prefer chi for the next gathering, only because in
reference notation pi so clearly implies a gathering
or gatherings that "p[recede]" any other series;
"[p]reliminary" gets to be iffy, and once again you
end up having to make judgments about a really rather
trivial matter, when what you want to do is just lay
out the structure and leaf relationships in a way that
will support unambiguous reference. So I guess I think
of pi as representing "[p]rae".</font></font>
<div>
<font size="4"><font face="garamond,serif"><br
clear="all">
</font></font><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD
NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY :
BROWN UNIVERSITY<br>
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU"
target="_blank">RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU</a> </font><br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:55 PM,
John Lancaster <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jjlancaster@me.com">jjlancaster@me.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt
0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204,
204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word;">Richard beat me
to it - but to the last point (i.e. if there is no
signing before B), it's an awkward situation, as
Bowers reveals in wavering back and forth between
inferring [A] for the first of two such
gatherings, using chi for the second, or using pi,
2pi - he calls the latter a "conservative formula"
(p. 215), but then on the next page says he
prefers inference, saying the pi-2pi solution
"exhibits an unnecessary, and even incorrect,
conservatism."
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>I prefer not to infer [A] for either
gathering and would go with pi^2 2pi^6 - whether
that's "conservative" or not, I can't fathom.
But it doesn't seem to me there's any
particular rationale for considering one or the
other of such gatherings the reasonable
precursor to the rest of the signing sequence
(to "privilege" it, in the current jargon) -
which, it seems to me, is the suggestion when an
inferred signature is used.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On the other hand, given the scenario
described, it seems unlikely that there would
be no signing in the first gathering, so the
problem might never arise. Randy, what is the
signing (and pagination) of those first leaves
in the examples you're working with?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<font color="#888888">
<div>John Lancaster</div>
</font>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Sep 9, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Noble,
Richard wrote:</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<font size="4"><font
face="garamond,serif">If you were
in RBS Des Bib, I'd have the right
to tell y'all that the right way
to describe this is pi^2 A^6 ...
etc. The <i>printing </i>formula
is A^8; but in the <i>issue</i> formula
for the correctly finished book
you always describe the structure
in terms of the relationships of
the bifolia (folds). To call these
eight leaves A^8 leaves you with a
formula that is, quite simply,
incorrect: that superscript 8 has
a very unambiguous meaning. (This
is the most basic of all rules for
this species of notation.)</font></font>
<div>
<font size="4"><font
face="garamond,serif"><br>
</font></font></div>
<div><font size="4"><font
face="garamond,serif">You may
still--really should--explain
how this bit of structure came
about, since you need to make it
clear that the frontispiece leaf
is not a plate. Also, </font></font><span
style="font-family:
garamond,serif; font-size: large;">assuming
that gathering A includes
signatures, it may be that, say,
leaf A2 in the book as bound is
signed A3--in which case it must
be noted as missigned.
("Missigned" doesn't necessarily
mean that the printer made a
mistake; it simply means that the
signature doesn't correspond to
the structure of the finished
book.) If there are no signatures
before B, the right formula would
be [A]^2 chi^6 ..., though there's
(just) wiggle room for debate
about the designation of the
second gathering.</span>
<div>
<font face="'courier new',
monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="'courier new',
monospace">RICHARD NOBLE : RARE
BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY
LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY<br>
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 :
401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU"
target="_blank">RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU</a>
</font><br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu,
Sep 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Deborah
J. Leslie <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DJLeslie@folger.edu"
target="_blank">DJLeslie@folger.edu</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid
rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
Randy,<br>
<br>
I would stay away from your
first example; there is no
need to separate<br>
'A' out of the sequence, since
the parenthetical doesn't
affect the<br>
number of leaves, but only
gives more information about
the content. One<br>
way is to put this kind of
information after a semi-colon
at the end of<br>
the signature statement. I.e.,
Signatures: A-Z[superscript8];
A8 is the<br>
frontispiece.<br>
<br>
I like the wording of your
note, though, which could be
used along with<br>
or instead of the information
as part of the signature
statement.<br>
Perhaps a slight tweaking,
something like: Leaf A8 is
back-folded to<br>
form the frontispiece.<br>
<div><br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu"
target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>
[mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu"
target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>]
On<br>
Behalf Of Randal Brandt<br>
</div>
<div>Sent: Thursday, 09
September, 2010 13:48<br>
To: DCRM Revision Group List<br>
Subject: [DCRM-L]
Frontispiece conjugate with
t.p.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div> I'm trying to come up
with a clear (and elegant)
way to describe a<br>
frontispiece that integral
to the first gathering and
is conjugate with<br>
the title page. I have
seen several examples of
this situation, and a<br>
couple of different ways
to express it, and would
appreciate it if<br>
anyone on this list has
something better to offer.<br>
<br>
Here's the deal: In, for
example, an octavo, the
frontispiece<br>
illustration is printed on
the verso of the last leaf
(A8) of the first<br>
gathering. The sheet is
folded and opened (at
least partially) before<br>
binding, A8 is then folded
around so that it precedes
A1, thus forming a<br>
<br>
frontispiece that is
conjugate to the t.p.
(A1). Assuming the page<br>
numbering starts with A1,
the page number of B1 is
then 15, and so on.<br>
<br>
Here are some ways of
expressing this in the
catalog record:<br>
<br>
Example 1:<br>
Signatures: A[superscript
8] (A8=frontispiece)
B-Z[superscript8]<br>
Note: Frontispiece is
conjugate with title page<br>
<br>
Example 2:<br>
Signatures:
A-Z[superscript8]<br>
Note: Leaves A1.8 folded
to form frontispiece (leaf
A8) and title page<br>
(leaf A1)<br>
<br>
<br>
Any preferences for either
of the above examples? Any
other ideas? I've<br>
looked through Bowers and
Gaskell and cannot find
anything like this.<br>
(Most of the examples like
this I have seen have been
in German<br>
imprints.)<br>
<br>
Thanks!<br>
Randy<br>
<br>
--<br>
__________________________<br>
Randal Brandt<br>
Principal Cataloger<br>
The Bancroft Library<br>
(510) 643-2275<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rbrandt@library.berkeley.edu" target="_blank">rbrandt@library.berkeley.edu</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/" target="_blank">http://bancroft.berkeley.edu</a><br>
"It's hard enough to
remember my opinions
without<br>
remembering my reasons for
them"--The Streets.<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
__________________________
Randal Brandt
Principal Cataloger
The Bancroft Library
(510) 643-2275
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rbrandt@library.berkeley.edu">rbrandt@library.berkeley.edu</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bancroft.berkeley.edu">http://bancroft.berkeley.edu</a>
"It's hard enough to remember my opinions without
remembering my reasons for them"--The Streets.
</pre>
</body>
</html>