[ModLib] More First Edition Points Needed For Many Titles

Scot Kamins kamins at modernlib.com
Mon Jul 2 13:41:38 EDT 2007


Long-time Dogeared/ModenLib member and supporter Barry Miller sent me  
the following well thought out comments. He's given me permission to  
post them here for discussion. I'll post my reply to him in a follow- 
up e-mail:


In the past few months I've checked specific ML titles for first  
edition points, possibly eight or ten times. Don't claim to be` an  
authority on the fine job you and others have done with this new  
addition to your webpage. But in every case, as I recall, I've gotten  
the impression that the indicated points may be insufficient for  
pinning down whether a book is indeed a first edition.

For example, in no instance did I see (so far as I can remember) you  
use the dating guide. In a way that suits me fine because I find the  
dating guide highly suspect, especially for later years (late 60s).  
Sometimes those book catalogs are as much as five years old. I'm  
delighted to think that a handful of my books from that period which  
defy accurate dating via the dating guide may be  firsts after all.  
Only yesterday, a friend and fellow ML collector asked me to verify  
whether two late sixties MLs in his collection are firsts. One of  
them, The Buddhist Tradition, #205 has a catalog. But that`catalog is  
way out of whack. So in both cases I fell back on your description  
whether it's sufficient or not-- stated ML edition on copyright page  
and #14 binding.

You also do not appear to use what might be called secondary issues  
like DJ back panel style and flyleaf price. Sometimes, I think, those  
factors help establish the validity of a first; sometimes they cast  
doubt on it.

Scot Kamins
"Let 'em all go to hell except Cave 76" -- the very first national  

More information about the ModLib mailing list