Of College Editions & Paperbacks

Amy dbapaper at ix.netcom.com
Sat Apr 7 13:42:04 EDT 2001


    I think your approach to first issue DJs has been right on target. I
don't think collectors understand, though, that your valuations in the
Guide are for a range of three numbers and that, where an exact number
is material, a + sign signifies an increase in valuation. I find that
customers generally expect to pay less for an ML first if the DJ is
within the range of three, but not exact. While we're on the subject, I
have a couple of questions:

    -- Are there priorities for first issue DJs that do have the exact
number for a first issue? For example, I have a copy of The Prince with
the exact 271 number for the first issue (which is especially important
for this title, since it's an unstated First), but I've been told that
it is not first issue because it lists too many Giant titles.

    -- Given ML's habit of changing DJs, what's the story when the book
remains the same but something material has changed on the DJ? A case in
point is the Modern Library Dictionary. I have a copy that states First
Modern Library Edition 1959 with a DJ listing 388 titles, within the
range of three. However, this DJ is designated No. 1 on the spine (1.6
in the Guide), not No. 4 (4.4 in the Guide). If the book is the same,
should this be considered a First because the DJ is within the range of
three, or not because the number designation changed?

    -- In the early 1930s, ML seems to have changed its DJ numbers by 5
or 10 at a time. The progression goes something like 185, 190, 200, 210,
225 with no DJ's reflecting intermediary numbers. Is there a different
range that ought to apply here?

    Any thoughts on these questions will be most appreciated.

Amy Comeau

BooksetcSF at aol.com wrote:

> A question for all those collectors of firsts.
> Many collectors want the first issue dj. i.e. the lowest number on a
> dj for a
> particular title.
> Is this the correct approach. Bare in mind that the publisher was in
> the
> habit of switching djs.
> Question: If you see ten copies for a first (on copyright page) with a
> particular dj # and one or two with a lower number, are these lower
> numbers
> freaks, i.e. curios and not the genuine first dj. Take Boswell's
> Johnson, for
> instance, (Regular ML): the last five or six first editions (on
> copyright
> page), I have seen,  have had #362. The Guide states #360. Is the #360
> a
> curiosity.....In order to allow for this I have not been too rigid in
> the
> guide for first dj numbers, allowing  a margin of error of two or
> three
> numbers. Any opinions out there?
>                             Henry for Books etc
>       P.S. Don't forget sales tax if to be shipped within CA. Or email
> CA
> resale #.
> Books etc
> PMB # 395,
> 298 4th Avenue,
> San Francisco,
> CA 94118-2468
> Fone/Fax 415-387-7162
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://thuban.owu.edu/pipermail/modlib/attachments/20010407/5e2d73c0/attachment.html

More information about the ModLib mailing list