[DCRM-L] Glossary Terms

Tue Jan 11 14:59:28 MST 2005

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with this. A publisher wants to issue
copies free from ANY errors (binding included). I'm copying an early email
I sent to Stephen and Randy that might be useful:

>>I understand Stephen's concern with variants and the potential impact on
the definition I've offered. The way I understand this, the publisher
planned binding variants to, among other reasons, increase sales. So even
though one copy was bound in blue cloth with gilt and another in blue cloth
with 2 ink colors they are both perfect since the publisher intended them
to be issued the way they were issued. Maybe I'm a bit prejudiced since I
work almost exclusively with books from the machine-press period and I see
a lot of these variations, including limited editions produced in
conjunction with "regular editions." I did think of these when drafting my
definition and I was hoping that the "as issued" took care of it. Maybe
not...

>>One of the reasons I think we can avoid the issue of inking quality to
the definition is simply as Stephen stated in his argument... that quality
printing means different things to different people and there are a lot of
over- and/or under-inked books produced by presses without a second
thought.

>>Imperfect copies, I agree, come in many forms. Do we want to be copy
specific? If a page is torn from a book it is imperfect but there is
evidence (hopefully) that that book was issued as intended when compared to
other copies. Unfortunately, most books are imperfect if we start to think
of copy specific problems. What about foxing? Crushed corners? Torn
headbands? Tight bindings? There are a lot of imperfections but I think the
copy specific imperfections should not be part of the glossary.

Nina

+------------------
Nina Schneider
Librarian
Berg Collection of English & American Literature, Room 320
The New York Public Library
Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street
New York, NY  10018-2788

Tel.: (212) 642-0111
Fax.: (212) 930-0079
nschneider at nypl.org

                      "Deborah J.                                                                           
                      Leslie"                  To:       <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>                               
                      <DJLeslie at FOLGER.        cc:                                                          
                      edu>                     Subject:  RE: [DCRM-L] Glossary Terms                        
                      Sent by:                                                                              
                      dcrm-l-admin at lib.                                                                     
                      byu.edu                                                                               

                      01/11/2005 02:41                                                                      
                      PM                                                                                    
                      Please respond to                                                                     
                      dcrm-l                                                                                

Yes, I think the definition of "perfect" ought to suggest a complete
copy as issued by the printer. In my mind, binding errors doesn't make a
copy imperfect. Yet there has to be something of that idea in the
definition so that when we tell a cataloger to base the description on a
perfect copy, she knows to base it on her copy as if it were correctly
bound.

________________________
Deborah J. Leslie
Folger Library
djleslie at folger.edu