A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » Books
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Book manufacturing error. What to do about a book with pages uncut/unseparated at the bottom?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 29th 03, 10:36 PM
nelson family
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old September 30th 03, 10:35 AM
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old September 30th 03, 01:19 PM
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old October 2nd 03, 12:53 AM
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old October 2nd 03, 02:36 PM
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 03:04 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.