John M. Wolansky jwol at fast.net
Thu Feb 13 19:18:08 EST 2003

... I sort my collection just as you do.

I didn't understand your reference to Lost Weekend, so I checked my
bookshelf.  Never realized it was oversized for the time!  Looking at the
print, thought, appears the plates they used were a bit high for the normal
ML cover 8 size, so they "supersized" it.

Actually, there was also an oversized leatherette.  The first ML of The
Rainbow by Lawrence was clearly 1/4" taller than the standard leatherette
and appears to have been manufactured that way to accommodate the plates.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Williamson" <jwslaw at jimmywilliamson.com>
To: <modlib at algol.owu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 11:57 PM
Subject: RE: Number sorters (was Re: [::tap tap::] Is this thing on?)

> i am a number sorter, but, in categories,
> you got your giants
> regular
> 70s series
> flex bindings
> 80s
> 90s
> buckram
> illustrateds
> paperbacks
> and two different sizes of balloon bindings(what is that all
> about)
> oh, yeah, and lost weekend
> big pain, but just as good as any other
> btw, i vote no selling on the list , except the rarities noted
> jw
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-modlib at algol.owu.edu [mailto:owner-modlib at algol.owu.edu]On
> Behalf Of j b krygier
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:53 PM
> To: modlib at algol.owu.edu
> Subject: Number sorters (was Re: [::tap tap::] Is this thing on?)
> jpete9530 at msn.com wrote:
> > Since I have my ML books arranged by number,
> Egad, a number sorter.  Does not the different
> heights of the books perturb you?
> I used to have my MLs all mixed in with other series
> books (Everyman's etc) in alphabetical order, but now
> the MLs are segregated and sorted by binding type, then
> alphabetically.  My two year old has hit upon a very
> different and interesting way of organizing my MLs,
> but I have yet to fathom the logic behind it.
> jk

More information about the ModLib mailing list