[ModLib] Designation for regular binding style variation?

Ron Holl ron at scribblemonger.com
Fri Jun 24 15:49:06 EDT 2011


The problem with changing (rather than enhancing) the nomenclature is that
it potentially breaks existing entries in databases.  Darrell, your
proposal does not create a different '5', but eliminates it.  So there can
be a mapping from 5 -> 5b... but in general we have avoided changing any
existing values.

I think 5b or 5* is fine, although I would go with 5b.  Nobody should be
basing anything off of the identifiers alone.



> Scot,
>  
> I recommend changing 5 to 5B and 5* to 5C.  That puts them in
> chronologocal and alphabetical order. Then on the website you can simply
> note that the two variants (5A and 5C) weren't distinguished yet in The
> Price Guide so Toledano 5 would have been taken to refer to 5B (generally)
> and all three collectively.
>  
> I always thought my blind stamped covers had simply lost their gilt, since
> I have volumes that basically have no gilt left anywhere. But it was quite
> puzzling with those volumes that had no gilt left on the cover when the
> spines were still bright and sharp.
>  
> Darrell 
>
> From: Scot Kamins <kamins at modernlib.com>
> To: For collectors of Modern Library books <modlib at thuban.owu.edu>
> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 12:01 PM
> Subject: [ModLib] Designation for regular binding style variation?
>
> Folks,
>
> As I was preparing for a talk about the ML I'm giving on Saturday at a
> local book faire, I noticed that the Regular Bindings Style page
> (http://www.modernlib.com/Identifiers/bindingsReg/bindingsReg.html) had no
> illustration for the Style 5 variation (the grape-leaf spine) with a
> blind-stamped logo on the front panel. I added it, and designated it Style
> 5*.
>
> The reason I used 5* is that there already is a 5a, evidently only in use
> in April 1929. Here are all the dates (which I'd be happy to correct if
> necessary) & descriptions:
> 5a: April 1929 -- Spine: gold text; double lines at spine top; grape vine
> image at spine bottom. Front: Kent torchbearer image stamped in gold
> 5: April 1929 - May (?) 1930. Spine: gold text; no lines at top; grape
> vine image at spine bottom. Front: Kent torchbearer image stamped in gold
> 5*: May 1930 - November 1930. Spine: gold text; no lines at top; grape
> vine image at spine bottom. Front: blindstamped Kent torchbearer image
>
> The reason I used 5* for the new image is that 5a is earlier than 5 and I
> thought that 5b for a later style would be confusing. (OK, MORE
> confusing.) I can easily be talked into using a different designation. but
> we have to decide now before the 5* designation takes hold.
>
> Your comments please?
>




More information about the ModLib mailing list