Dogeared 53, ModLib 128
jbkrygie at owu.edu
Thu Jan 13 17:44:15 EST 2005
On Jan 13, 2005, at 11:49 AM, McBride, Jo-Anne C MCF:EX wrote:
> Discussing the books and ending up with a full rounded and eclectic
> knowledge of literature and the arts is my purpose in collecting ML.
On a related note:
Just found this interesting article on the the reading habits
of the working class, from a historical perspective. The ML
is not mentioned, but Everyman's is, and the argument is that
the common joe or jolene were interested in reading the classics
and cheap reprint series books were in part an indication of this.
One of the reasons I collect the ML (and Everyman's, and dozens
of other series) are to remind me that at some time in the past,
the common guy or gal was interested in such literature, ideas,
and intellectual betterment. The sheer number of series (I have
at least one book from nearly 70 series equivalent to the ML or
Everyman's) suggests this was the case. This has obviously changed
(The "Reading at Risk" report found that 43% of US adults did not
read a single book in 2002 - and that would include almost any kind
> Variations are wasted on me, as are discussions about bindings,
> foxing, dust
> jackets and first editions. (But reading other people's fascination
> about it
> is still interesting!)
If not downright alarming, bordering, some might claim, on
> If any one wanted to start looking at content, I'd be in on that. Last
> I started a group on Yahoo, but it didn't catch on, but another person
> have better luck.
You can always try here again - there have been dozens of new
subscribers since last year. You can certainly share your thoughts
on MLs you have read.
More information about the ModLib