Book-of-the-Month Club Question

I know it is generally held that the contruction of Book-of-the-Month
Club books are physically made with less care and quality. My
question regards the setting of the text. Do they often use the exact
same layout as normal editions? Are BOTMC books more likely to have
copyedit errors, typos, or the like?

Andrew

On Jul 25, 7:01 am, Ferris92 wrote:
I know it is generally held that the contruction of Book-of-the-Month
Club books are physically made with less care and quality. My
question regards the setting of the text. Do they often use the exact
same layout as normal editions? Are BOTMC books more likely to have
copyedit errors, typos, or the like?

Andrew

Back when I worked for a publisher, we sent the final electronic files
to the book club and then they just used that to create the plates and
print. Everything inside stayed the same (i.e. if there were any
errors, they appeared in our edition too!), but the book club used
their house stock paper for both interior and softcover. I could tell
a difference -- and the triim was just a tad smaller, probably to fit
that house stock, so there was a little less top and bottom margin. A
lot of the differences weren't real obvious unless you put the book we
had printed and the book the book club printed side by side.

Before electronic composition, I don't know if BOMC set their own type
or not. Some very early reprint houses, like Donohue, would buy the
original publisher's printing plates and run their own copies.
Because these plates had been on the presses for several runs, you'd
see "drop outs" and other errors just caused by wear on plates. And
those companies also used a house stock, generally a cheaper paper.
In printing a cheaper paper is usually a lighter sheet -- let's say 60
lb as opposed to 65 lb -- and that might lead to some bleed through of
ink etc.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://collectingkidsbooks.blogspot.com/

Lost Loves Books wrote:
On Jul 25, 7:01 am, Ferris92 wrote:

I know it is generally held that the contruction of Book-of-the-Month
Club books are physically made with less care and quality. My
question regards the setting of the text. Do they often use the exact
same layout as normal editions? Are BOTMC books more likely to have
copyedit errors, typos, or the like?

Andrew


Back when I worked for a publisher, we sent the final electronic files
to the book club and then they just used that to create the plates and
print. Everything inside stayed the same (i.e. if there were any
errors, they appeared in our edition too!), but the book club used
their house stock paper for both interior and softcover. I could tell
a difference -- and the triim was just a tad smaller, probably to fit
that house stock, so there was a little less top and bottom margin. A
lot of the differences weren't real obvious unless you put the book we
had printed and the book the book club printed side by side.

Before electronic composition, I don't know if BOMC set their own type
or not. Some very early reprint houses, like Donohue, would buy the
original publisher's printing plates and run their own copies.
Because these plates had been on the presses for several runs, you'd
see "drop outs" and other errors just caused by wear on plates. And
those companies also used a house stock, generally a cheaper paper.
In printing a cheaper paper is usually a lighter sheet -- let's say 60
lb as opposed to 65 lb -- and that might lead to some bleed through of
ink etc.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://collectingkidsbooks.blogspot.com/


Another difference is the absence of a spine collar in most book club editions.
The stock paper of a book club printer is also likely to have acid content
and will yellow faster over the years. Doubleday prints all of its BOMC books
the same size, no matter the size of the original book. I first noticed this
when I saw that the book club edition for Douglas Adams' "Restaurant at the End
of the Universe" was in fact larger than the regular edition. Usually, it is
the other way around, with the club edition beeing about an inch shorter than
the original.


Francis A. Miniter