CollectingBanter

CollectingBanter (http://www.collectingbanter.com/index.php)
-   Books (http://www.collectingbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   The Dharma Bums (http://www.collectingbanter.com/showthread.php?t=120377)

March 12th 05 07:39 PM

The Dharma Bums
 
I have read that the first Viking printing of "The Dharma Bums' incorrectly
states "First Published in 1950". What printing then is the edition that
states "Published in 1958" with no statement of a 2nd or later printing.



Jon Meyers March 13th 05 05:16 PM

wrote...
I have read that the first Viking printing of "The Dharma Bums'

incorrectly
states "First Published in 1950". What printing then is the edition that
states "Published in 1958" with no statement of a 2nd or later printing.


McBride does say that the first state of this book shows the 1950 date, and
"may or may not have label correcting this error." There are (at least) two
possible explanations of a "Published in 1958" copy: 1) It's the second
state of the first printing, after the correction was made. But I don't know
if such a state even exists; the Ahearns make no mention of it. 2) It's a
book club edition, which may or may not have had the error in the first
place.


--
Jon Meyers
(To reply, lose
your way)



Bob March 14th 05 12:58 PM

wrote in message ...
I have read that the first Viking printing of "The Dharma Bums' incorrectly
states "First Published in 1950". What printing then is the edition that
states "Published in 1958" with no statement of a 2nd or later printing.


I don't know about that but I have a couple of episodes of Dharma & Greg on tape
if that will help ;)

--
Bob Finnan
http://bobfinnan.com



[email protected] March 14th 05 05:45 PM

I'm pretty sure that this is a bibliographic 'ghost' caused by a
misreading of an early edition of Ahearn. I remember debating this for
some time with a colleague but no longer have that edition of Ahearn--
had to do with a misplaced comma or something of the sort....


Jon Meyers March 14th 05 09:15 PM

wrote...
I'm pretty sure that this is a bibliographic 'ghost' caused by a
misreading of an early edition of Ahearn. I remember debating this for
some time with a colleague but no longer have that edition of Ahearn--
had to do with a misplaced comma or something of the sort....


Yes--while I was misreading McBride, I went ahead and misread the Ahearns
while I was at it. Their note about the incorrect date also refers to the
UK edition. (Not a good day for me all around, I'd say; sometimes you see
what you think you're going to see and not what's actually there.)


--
Jon Meyers
(To reply, lose
your way)




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CollectingBanter.com