If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Book manufacturing error. What to do about a book with pages uncut/unseparated at the bottom?
I have a book that has rough cut pages on two edges (side and bottom).
The tops of the pages are smoothly/uniformly cut. The real dilemma is a manufacturing error at the bottom of the pages. Nearly every other set of adjoining pages have never been separated/cut apart, so you can't pull them apart to read them. The really sad part is that this book is the extremely rare Mandate For Change signed by Dwight Eisenhower in perfect condition with original glassine DJ. Only the slipcase is showing any signs of wear. He only signed 1400 of these for Doubleday back in 1963. Who could I take this to in order to have the bottom of the pages cut/separated? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
nelson family wrote:
I have a book that has rough cut pages on two edges (side and bottom). The tops of the pages are smoothly/uniformly cut. The real dilemma is a manufacturing error at the bottom of the pages. Nearly every other set of adjoining pages have never been separated/cut apart, so you can't pull them apart to read them. The first question is whether or not it is actually an "error". Books used to be marketed unopened (i.e., like your alternate bottom edges) and/or uncut (i.e., like your side and remaining bottom edges). In such cases, many collectors have a slight preference for unopened copies, but it doesn't really make that much difference. Then there was a kind of revival of the practice, even though technology had moved on and books were routinely trimmed smooth before hitting the bookshop shelves. I suppose in those cases the unopened pages are regarded as a feature of the way the book was first issued and (without knowing much about it) I'd imagine if they are still unopened collectors would probably pay a premium for them. So if this edition was marketed that way it wouldn't be an error and it would be better to leave it as it is. The really sad part is that this book is the extremely rare Mandate For Change signed by Dwight Eisenhower in perfect condition with original glassine DJ. Only the slipcase is showing any signs of wear. He only signed 1400 of these for Doubleday back in 1963. 1434, apparently (http://www.ehistorybuff.com/eisenhowerbk.html). The picture conforms to your description, but the seller says nothing about there being any unopened pages. Nor do any of the ABE sellers offering this book make any mention of such a thing. One seller (the somewhat exorbitantly-priced Heritage Book Shop) mentions the uncut edges but - assuming they've got their terminology right, and I think they have - that is simply a reference to the rough edges you describe, not to unseparated pages. That leads me to suppose that the unopened pages probably *are* an error. As is currently being pointed out in another thread ("What's wrong with this book?"), errors do not generally enhance the value of a book. The exception would be if the error was an issue point. In this case, if the first printing - or even the first batch of the first printing, or a later batch - had been issued unopened (whether intentionally or not) then the unopened pages would be an issue point, and you would do best to leave them as they are. However, if - as seems likely - your copy is an isolated "freak" the error does nothing to enhance the value. On the contrary, it is a defect. Who could I take this to in order to have the bottom of the pages cut/separated? Check it out thoroughly and draw your own conclusions as to whether it is indeed a one-off error (don't take my word for it, as all I've done is a bit of preliminary googling and whatnot!). If you decide it is, then my advice would indeed be to open it. Cut the pages carefully with a rounded blade. Don't use a sharp knife, as it may easily run out of the groove where the paper is folded and cut into the page. And don't use something *too* blunt, as it may produce a jagged tear, rather than a straight cut. I've opened old books myself, and it's a job I find is best done late at night, when there are no distractions, and you can work slowly and carefully. Practise with some folded sheets of regular paper first. As for taking it to someone else to do it, the only people I can think of who may be practised in the art are the custodians of rare books in certain libraries, who will from time to time have to open pages of old books for readers. -- John http://rarebooksinjapan.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
michael adams wrote:
The reason why the majority* of copies of this title coming onto the market can no longer be described as "unopened", will probably be because they will have been opened by their initial purchasers in order to be read. Michael, do you have any evidence that this really is the reason? Do have any evidence that this edition was originally issued with the pages unopened? Do you have any evidence that the Nelson family's copy is anything other than a defective copy, a one-off freak? If so, please advance your evidence and I will bow to it. This book has a companion volume (Waging Peace), apparently also with uncut (i.e., untrimmed edges). Together, the two volumes contain 650 and 741 pages respectively (plus prefaces). If they *were* unopened as well as uncut that's a heck of a lot of cutting, and it's rather odd that none of the copies of either volume currently being offered online appears to have any unopened pages. I noted (but did not mention in my previous posting) that one of the ABE copies is described as "A very fine copy in very fine slipcase, preserved as new in the publisher's shipping box." (the same seller also has a copy of Waging Peace, similarly described). It seems particularly odd that someone would go to the trouble of opening these books and then returning them to the boxes they had been shipped in.. The Nelsons would do well to contact some other sellers to find out if any copies have unopened pages, and try to track down an appropriate reference work which may resolve the matter. If it does turn out that it was generally issued unopened then this is an issue point and it should (from the point of view of a purist collector) be left. If not, it is merely a defect and, as I said before, it would probably be better to open it. The question that then arises is whether such modifications ought to be declared when the book is sold. Common practice suggests it needn't be (i.e., if a book is unopened that will generally be included in the seller's description, but if it has been opened that fact will not be noted), but I'd be interested to know what others think. -- John http://rarebooksinjapan.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Adams wrote:
Unopened pages in older books are simply the result of those particular folds missing the trimming knife. Agreed, except that frequently there was no trimming knife and books were simply marketed without opening the pages. This book has been deliberately produced with uncut edges on two sides. Yes, it looks that way (http://www.ehistorybuff.com/eisenhowerbk.html). Its impossible to fold a sheet of book paper so the folds only occur on two edges of the finished book. It's not impossible at all. It just depends on how many times the sheet has been folded. A folio volume is made of sheets that have been folded once; all three adges will be free of folds. A quarto is made of sheets which have been folded twice; one edge (the top edge by convention, but it could equally well be the bottom) will be folded. An octavo is made of sheets which have been folded three times; two edges (the fore-edge and the top or, possibly, bottom) will contain folds. The third edge will not contain any folds. To be bound in this way, the original sheet would have to be printed lengthwise, with, from left to right, pages 5, 12, 9 and 8 upside down at the top and 5, 12, 9 and 8 right-way up at the bottom on one side of the sheet, and pages 7, 10, 11 and 6 upside down at the top and 2, 15, 14 and 3 right-way up at the bottom on the other side. Try it; take a piece of A4 paper, fold it in half, then again and once again (always folding lengthwise). This makes eight leaves of paper. On one of the longer sides each leaf is connected to another via one central fold. This side will be at the spine of the book, where the signatures are sewn. The other longer side will have four leaves that are separated followed by four unseparated ones. This side is the front edge of the book. One of the shorter sides consists of two sets of four leaves each connected by a fold. The other side has no folds. 16mo consists of a sheet folded in half twice, then in thirds, and again the finished book will have folds on only two sides (the fore-edge and - normally - the top). 24mo consists of a sheet folded four times, and has folds on all three edges. Of course, there are many variations on these basic folds, but the point is that in principle it is perfectly possible for a book to have unopened or uncut bottom and fore-edges and be perfectly smooth *from the beginning* at the top (since that edge consists only of edge parts of the original sheet, with no folds). -- John http://rarebooksinjapan.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Adams wrote:
However as soon as you fold it once in the other direction, after having folded it twice already, you must have a fold in three sides. Yes, that's right. There is a fold of three sides of the *paper*, but that is not the same as saying that there is a fold on three edges of the *book*. A book only has three edges (top, bottom and fore-edge). The fourth side is the spine, where the signatures are sewn together. What you seem to be saying here, is that a book can indeed have three sides with folds. In this case bottom, fore edge, and spine. Which is what I was suggesting for this book. I can quite see that that was what you *meant*, but what you actually *said* was: Its impossible to fold a sheet of book paper so the folds only occur on two edges of the finished book. That is incorrect, because - as I say - a book only has three edges, only two of which (in an octavo book) will normally have folds. So we are in agreement that three out of four sides of the pages of an octavo book will have folds. The confusion arises when you try to count the spine as an "edge" of the book. It isn't. Except I was suggesting the side without folds was the fore edge, rather than the top. That's a possible variant, but the more usual arrangement is for the bottom edge to be the one without folds. But the weird and wonderful ways of bookbinders sometimes defy logic. I have in front of me right now, for example, a copy of Stevenson's Underwoods, in which the signatures consist of eight leaves (i.e., octavo), but the distribution of opened and unopened edges is very peculiar. The pages have all been opened, so all I have to go on is uncut edges (where the logical assumption is that there *was* a fold at some point) versus smooth edges (where there was no fold). Most of the pages are uncut at the top edge and fore-edge, as one would expect, but there are scattered leaves (not according to any pattern that I can observe) which have *all three* edges uncut. Sometimes there is just one such leaf, sometimes two or three together. I'm assuming that the third fold must have been opened *before* the actual binding took place, since if it had been bound with folds on all three edges there would have been nowhere to insert the blade and it would have been impossible to open the pages, but I'm still not sure what procedure led to this result. It's quite a small book, so at first I hypothesised that each octavo signature was actually made up of *half* an original sheet, but that wouldn't give the same distribution or overall number of uncut edges. -- John http://rarebooksinjapan.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FA: 2-Days, WWI Battlefields of the Marne Book in DJ, c. 1917 | fishnet531 | General | 0 | July 6th 04 02:18 AM |
Book signing information | Ted Kupczyk | Autographs | 6 | November 2nd 03 02:04 PM |
Da Book | Michael Oates | Pens & Pencils | 13 | September 16th 03 12:44 AM |
autographs | dani.steiner | General | 0 | July 19th 03 06:08 AM |
Reducing Autograph Collection | dani.steiner | Autographs | 0 | July 16th 03 02:29 PM |