[DCRM-L] Collation conundrum

[Noble, Richard]

The problem with A^8 (A8 + chi 1.2) is that it can only be construed as an
alternate and incorrect* formulation for A^8 [B]^2. That is, of course, a
perfectly possible composition for a copy in which the conjugate blank leaf
is not "wrapped back", and if that were the only copy one had seen there
would be no reason to formulate ideal copy otherwise.

This is an instance of a hard case making dicey law, since the use of the
outer fold as a self wrapper is essentially a binding decision. In the end A^8
[B]^2 may be the best description, with a note to the effect that blank B2
is usually, or in all known cases (if you have evidence that "thick"),
wrapped back to form a front cover; it can't be presented as representing
ideal copy. "Blank half title" is the sort of pawky witticism that could be
expected from us bibliographer types, but it cannot be admitted to the
canon.

*On two counts: the position of B1 is unambiguous, and it is incorrect not
to infer its signature; also, since we are talking about a bifolium, it is,
if not wrapped back, simply an adjacent normal 2-leaf gathering, for which
the "+" insert notation is inappropriate.

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Lenore Rouse <rouse at cua.edu> wrote:

> Thank you to all who made suggestions on this. There seems little support
> for the arranged marriage of PI and CHI. I had considered the  pi1 + insert
> of A formulation but was hoping to avoid the complexity, though it seems
> the likeliest solution.
>
> But having once been forced to THINK, I confess Richard's "made up"
> solution points in another direction. It bothers me a bit to name the fold
> [B] but calling it PI also seems problematic when it was really an
> expedient afterthought to handle the last page of type, not meant to be a
> real prelim. Could one follow the Bowers practice of "associating" the
>  bifolium with leaf A8 while still calling it CHI, since the first leaf of
> the bifolium merely continues the text of A8? Perhaps:
> A^8 (A8 + chi 1.2)
> and a note to explain that chi2 is the conjugate unprinted "half title".
> If the note will not suffice could a cancellation/removal of chi2 work as
> well as the cancellation of [B]2 or does it make most sense to cave and go
> with [B]?
>
> Thanks again and best holiday wishes.
> Lenore
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20121120/ed50e11c/attachment.htm>