If not "Proofs", what would these be?

"Alana Martin" wrote...
On a quick visit to my favorite thrift shop today I found five soft
cover books which I cannot categorize. I'm hoping that someone here can
tell me what they are.

Each volume measures 8½" by 11" and is as basic as a "bound" book can
be. Each book is bound as a paperback would be, with plain, matte card
stock covers (Title and author printed on the front of four) and a plain
black cloth, single strip, wrapped spine.

The reproduction quality is commensurate with early photo-copying
processes and lines caused by page edges of original copied pages can be
seen. Prior to being bound in this format, the original pages had
undergone editing-those editing marks being reproduced on the pages of
these volumes.

More than one publishing house is represented in the pile*Scribner's and
Dutton included. Pencil notations indicate that these are "Dee's"
copies.

Numbers stamped on some books make me think that a library may be
involved [PS3515-E37-F35-1957c-cop.2] but why would a library be
receiving books in such an unfinished state?

Anyone familiar with this format?


These sound like copies of the author's typescript, although you didn't
mention if the text is typewriter-style or a typeset face. This is a very
early prepublication format, often intended only for in-house distribution
but sometimes also sent out to reviewers and booksellers.

But there are other possibilities--perhaps older books (looking at that 1957
in the LoC call number--is that a Hemingway book?) copied with the intention
of revising, updating and/or annotating. What are some of the specific
titles and dates of publication (or copyright)?


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

Alana Martin wrote:

"Jon Meyers" wrote:


"Alana Martin" wrote...

On a quick visit to my favorite thrift shop today I found five soft
cover books which I cannot categorize. I'm hoping that someone here can
tell me what they are.

Each volume measures 8½" by 11" and is as basic as a "bound" book can
be. Each book is bound as a paperback would be, with plain, matte card
stock covers (Title and author printed on the front of four) and a plain
black cloth, single strip, wrapped spine.

The reproduction quality is commensurate with early photo-copying
processes and lines caused by page edges of original copied pages can be
seen. Prior to being bound in this format, the original pages had
undergone editing-those editing marks being reproduced on the pages of
these volumes.

More than one publishing house is represented in the pile*Scribner's and
Dutton included. Pencil notations indicate that these are "Dee's"
copies.

Numbers stamped on some books make me think that a library may be
involved [PS3515-E37-F35-1957c-cop.2] but why would a library be
receiving books in such an unfinished state?

Anyone familiar with this format?


These sound like copies of the author's typescript, although you didn't
mention if the text is typewriter-style or a typeset face. This is a very
early prepublication format, often intended only for in-house distribution
but sometimes also sent out to reviewers and booksellers.


Four of the books do appear to have been typeset while one is definitely
type-writer style with numerous reproduced handwritten pages included.

But there are other possibilities--perhaps older books (looking at that 1957
in the LoC call number--is that a Hemingway book?)


Yes. This is Hemmingway's _A Farewell To Arms_.


copied with the intention
of revising, updating and/or annotating. What are some of the specific
titles and dates of publication (or copyright)?


On the Hemmingway volume there is a reproduced penciled inscription on
the title page of "1957". On the reverse is the copyright info—Copyright
1929 Charles Scribner's and Sons; renewal copyright 1957 Ernest
Hemmingway.

This volume has many page numbers circled, several paragraphs bracketed,
and numerous lines/words underlined or marked in the margins.

Another book is _The Centurions_ by Jean Lartéguy, translated from the
French by Xan Fielding. On the half title page is a notation in
typewriter face which says "Reprinted with permission from "PRESSES DE
LA CITE EDITEUR". It has a full copyright page with all the standard
info and copyright notices for the French and London publications as
well as the statement, "First published in the U.S.A., 1962 by E.P.
Dutton & Co." and "First Edition". One chapter has several lines of
text underlined while brackets and more underlining appear on a few
other pages.

Another is _Intimate Prussia_, by A. Raymond, E.P. Dutton, 1917,
reproduced from a small paged format with no corrections.

Also, _Getting Through West Point_ by John C. Tidball, no publication
info and apparently reproduced from the author's hand-written and
typewritten pages. I don't have the fifth book in front of me at this
writing.

Your input is much appreciated!



Would these qualify as "foul matter"?


Francis A. Miniter

"Francis A. Miniter" wrote...
Alana Martin wrote:
"Jon Meyers" wrote:
"Alana Martin" wrote...


Each volume measures 8½" by 11" and is as basic as a "bound" book can
be. Each book is bound as a paperback would be, with plain, matte card
stock covers (Title and author printed on the front of four) and a
plain
black cloth, single strip, wrapped spine.

The reproduction quality is commensurate with early photo-copying
processes and lines caused by page edges of original copied pages can
be
seen. Prior to being bound in this format, the original pages had
undergone editing-those editing marks being reproduced on the pages of
these volumes.

These sound like copies of the author's typescript...
[snip]
But there are other possibilities--perhaps older books...
...copied with the intention
of revising, updating and/or annotating. What are some of the specific
titles and dates of publication (or copyright)?

On the Hemmingway volume there is a reproduced penciled inscription on
the title page of "1957". On the reverse is the copyright info—Copyright
1929 Charles Scribner's and Sons; renewal copyright 1957 Ernest
Hemmingway.

This volume has many page numbers circled, several paragraphs bracketed,
and numerous lines/words underlined or marked in the margins.

Another book is _The Centurions_ by Jean Lartéguy, translated from the
French by Xan Fielding. On the half title page is a notation in
typewriter face which says "Reprinted with permission from "PRESSES DE
LA CITE EDITEUR". It has a full copyright page with all the standard
info and copyright notices for the French and London publications as
well as the statement, "First published in the U.S.A., 1962 by E.P.
Dutton & Co." and "First Edition". One chapter has several lines of
text underlined while brackets and more underlining appear on a few
other pages.

Another is _Intimate Prussia_, by A. Raymond, E.P. Dutton, 1917,
reproduced from a small paged format with no corrections.

Also, _Getting Through West Point_ by John C. Tidball, no publication
info and apparently reproduced from the author's hand-written and
typewritten pages. I don't have the fifth book in front of me at this
writing.

Would these qualify as "foul matter"?

That's a possibility, along the lines of my initial guess. But, given the
further description, I'm leaning towards thinking these are possibly
academic working copies--that is, some prof or grad student got copies made
and bound, maybe by the library, or at some place like Kinko's, in order to
have copies of scarce books (except for the Hemingway) that could be heavily
used and annotated.

The Raymond & Larteguy books are somewhat hard to come by, but it's the
Tidball item that seems most suggestive. I couldn't find any indication
that it had ever been published, but the LoC does have "The Reminiscences of
John C. Tidball," of which "Getting Through West Point" is apparently a
section, available in manuscript. (See:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl..._54552410/pg_8
5th para.) I'm guessing someone got a copy made for research purposes.

Why the Hemingway? Still just guessing, but possibly the particular version
of the text was required, or perhaps the person who had the copy made just
found the photocopy format easier to use for study and annotation.


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

"Alana Martin" wrote...
"Jon Meyers" wrote:

...I'm leaning towards thinking these are possibly
academic working copies...

I have the fifth book in front of me. It is _The Journal of Countess
Francoise Krasinska_, Translated from the Polish By Kasimir Dziekonska,
A. C. McClurg and Company, 1899, Seventh Edition.

I mention it because it has a reproduced stamp on the front which reads
"LIBRARY
RECEIVED Oct 11 1900
U. S. MILITARY ACADEMY
and another reproduced stamp on the title page which reads "LIBRARY
U.S.M.A." On the index of Illustrations is a reproduced, handwritten
date which looks like "2-27-24" and the number "26464".

Following this little trail of crumbs, I checked the West Point
library's catalogue for this title but could not find it. However, I did
find _A Farewell to Arms_, c.1957, indicated to be a photocopied
"preservation copy" of the same size as my volumes. Unfortunately, I was
unable to search the catalogue further as I began getting "connection
refused" errors.

So I did some more reading about "preservation copies" which eventually
led me to Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act. I was in way over my
head there, you betcha, but I did learn that a library may, under
certain circumstances, reproduce copyrighted works.

Might that be what these are? If so, that leaves several questions-not
least being, how did they wind up at my local thrift store?

Good detective work, and I'd guess you're probably correct. But I do feel a
tiny bit vindicated, since the books seem to be "academic working copies" of
a sort--but copied for a specialized library, rather than for a particular
individual.

As to your last question: Deaccession. Librarians can be ruthless when
space runs out and things have to go--or even when it doesn't, and they
don't. Or maybe the USMA Library acquired the actual books and decided it
didn't need the copies. Either way, I'm surprised those copies didn't end
up in a dumpster.


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