Discussion:
[tor dot com] Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
(too old to reply)
James Nicoll
2018-03-22 14:30:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?

https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
D B Davis
2018-03-22 16:20:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
_Psychohistorical Crisis_ (Kingsbury) fixes up "Historical Crisis,"
which appears in the _Far Futures_ (Benford, 1995) anthology. You know
me. "Less is more and the shorter the better." The original Asimov and
the original Kingsbury work better for me than their later fix ups. :)

Thank you,

--
Don
Robert Woodward
2018-03-22 17:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.

BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise." Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Peter Trei
2018-03-22 17:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.

pt
Robert Woodward
2018-03-23 17:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space. Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably more
than 1 book per book digitized).
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
J. Clarke
2018-03-24 00:48:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably more
than 1 book per book digitized).
Robert Carnegie
2018-03-24 04:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably more
than 1 book per book digitized).
J. Clarke
2018-03-24 12:53:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 21:08:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Why would you be using a tablet device to perform scans for OCR
purposes?
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably more
than 1 book per book digitized).
Robert Woodward
2018-03-24 16:48:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 21:08:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
<SNIP>
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Why would you be using a tablet device to perform scans for OCR
purposes?
To READ the scanned images. Which means that either the tablet has
enough storage to hold all scanned books or it has to depend on remote
storage (which isn't very helpful in areas where there is no relatively
cheap broadband access).
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
J. Clarke
2018-03-24 17:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 09:48:37 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 21:08:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
<SNIP>
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Why would you be using a tablet device to perform scans for OCR
purposes?
To READ the scanned images. Which means that either the tablet has
enough storage to hold all scanned books or it has to depend on remote
storage (which isn't very helpful in areas where there is no relatively
cheap broadband access).
Why would you be reading scanned images?
Cryptoengineer
2018-03-25 15:45:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out
-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new
books if the old books are still around using press time and
shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably
more than 1 book per book digitized).
When I suggested digitization, I was addressing the storage problem
that made books go out of print. I was envisaging publishers/authors
having the book digitized, OCR'd, and corrected once, and then making
digital copies available. I wasn't suggesting individual owners scan
and OCR their own copies.

pt
J. Clarke
2018-03-25 16:14:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 10:45:57 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out
-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new
books if the old books are still around using press time and
shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably
more than 1 book per book digitized).
When I suggested digitization, I was addressing the storage problem
that made books go out of print. I was envisaging publishers/authors
having the book digitized, OCR'd, and corrected once, and then making
digital copies available. I wasn't suggesting individual owners scan
and OCR their own copies.
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-25 16:49:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 10:45:57 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out
-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new
books if the old books are still around using press time and
shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably
more than 1 book per book digitized).
When I suggested digitization, I was addressing the storage problem
that made books go out of print. I was envisaging publishers/authors
having the book digitized, OCR'd, and corrected once, and then making
digital copies available. I wasn't suggesting individual owners scan
and OCR their own copies.
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Assuming the electronic form hasn't been erased.

(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
J. Clarke
2018-03-25 17:31:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 10:45:57 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:33:50 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out
-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new
books if the old books are still around using press time and
shelf space.
A one-time (albeit not quite trivial) digitizing job can fix that.
Scans of sufficient resolution will use up storage space.
It's 2018. Terabyte drives are dropping out of the bottom of the
market.
Not for tablet devices - not literally, not quite yet,
although a device built to play video, for instance, should
accommodate a substantial library of scanned books in its own
storage, if that's how it has to be. Devices are sufficiently
connected now that a book could be streamed, although I don't
know if this happens outside audiobooks. And of course it would
be annoying to lose connection and be unable to get the next page.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Woodward
Correcting OCR
will use up time more usefully spent reading more books (probably
more than 1 book per book digitized).
When I suggested digitization, I was addressing the storage problem
that made books go out of print. I was envisaging publishers/authors
having the book digitized, OCR'd, and corrected once, and then making
digital copies available. I wasn't suggesting individual owners scan
and OCR their own copies.
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Assuming the electronic form hasn't been erased.
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Juho Julkunen
2018-03-26 01:28:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, jclarke.873638
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiping

CBC apparently archived (almost) everything, though.
--
Juho Julkunen
J. Clarke
2018-03-26 02:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
Post by Juho Julkunen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiping
CBC apparently archived (almost) everything, though.
Juho Julkunen
2018-03-26 02:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, jclarke.873638
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
On the other hand, they are spending their own money.
--
Juho Julkunen
David Johnston
2018-03-26 03:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
And of course being private corporations they have no interest in saving
money.

Almost all of NBC's The Tonight Show with Jack Paar and the first ten
years (1962–1972) hosted by Johnny Carson were taped over by the network
and no longer exist. The videotape was being used repeatedly, hence the
reason that Carson's Tonight Show picture looked muddy during broadcast
in the late 1960s. Selected sequences from the 1962–1972 era survive and
were often replayed by Carson himself (particularly in the months
preceding his retirement in 1992) and have been released to home video.
Some Paar episodes also survive and have also been released to home
video—in this case, DVD.

Similarly, NBC reused the tapes of ventriloquist Shari Lewis's 1960-1963
Saturday morning children's program The Shari Lewis Show, to record
coverage of the 1964 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.
Lewis said in an interview decades later that to her, this was a shame,
since the shows were beautifully done as a showcase of NBC's early color
broadcast work.
Most US daytime soap opera episodes broadcast before 1978 have been
lost. The status of episodes, however, varies widely from show to show:
Soaps produced by Procter & Gamble Productions, including Search for
Tomorrow, Guiding Light, As the World Turns, The Edge of Night, and
Another World began preserving their episodes in 1978. A few scattered
episodes, mostly black and white kinescopes, of these series exist from
the 1950s, 1960s, and early to mid-1970s. The CBS soaps Love of Life and
The Secret Storm, as well as several short-lived shows, suffered the
same fate.
ABC's One Life to Live and All My Children were originally owned by
their creator, Agnes Nixon, who chose to archive all episodes. However,
early episodes of AMC were only saved as black-and-white kinescopes
despite being produced and telecast in color. ABC purchased the shows in
late 1974; different sources report that Nixon's archive was either lost
in a fire or erased. A few black-and-white kinescopes of both series'
early years exist, as well as a few color episodes. ABC began full
archiving of these soaps at Nixon's insistence when they expanded from
30 minutes to an hour—AMC in 1977, and OLTL in 1978.
Most 1963–1970 episodes of ABC's longest-running General Hospital
survive because the series was then owned by Selmur Productions. Few
episodes from 1970 to 1977 were saved. Ryan's Hope premiered in 1975,
several years before ABC began saving all of its daytime programming,
but exists in its entirety as it was originally owned by Labine-Mayer
Productions.
Dark Shadows, created by Dan Curtis, which ran from 1966 to 1971, has
the distinction of being one of the few soap operas to have nearly all
of its original episodes preserved. As a result of kinescope, many
earlier episodes of which the master film was lost are still available.
However, episode #1219 was lost but reconstructed with an audio
recording for home video release.
Two long-running soaps have full archives: Days of Our Lives, which
premiered in 1965, and The Young and the Restless, which premiered in
1973. Both series were originally distributed by Screen Gems.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-03-26 04:11:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Johnston
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
And of course being private corporations they have no interest in saving
money.
Almost all of NBC's The Tonight Show with Jack Paar and the first ten
years (1962–1972) hosted by Johnny Carson were taped over by the network
and no longer exist. The videotape was being used repeatedly, hence the
reason that Carson's Tonight Show picture looked muddy during broadcast
in the late 1960s. Selected sequences from the 1962–1972 era survive and
were often replayed by Carson himself (particularly in the months
preceding his retirement in 1992) and have been released to home video.
Some Paar episodes also survive and have also been released to home
video—in this case, DVD.
Similarly, NBC reused the tapes of ventriloquist Shari Lewis's 1960-1963
Saturday morning children's program The Shari Lewis Show, to record
coverage of the 1964 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.
Lewis said in an interview decades later that to her, this was a shame,
since the shows were beautifully done as a showcase of NBC's early color
broadcast work.
Most US daytime soap opera episodes broadcast before 1978 have been
Soaps produced by Procter & Gamble Productions, including Search for
Tomorrow, Guiding Light, As the World Turns, The Edge of Night, and
Another World began preserving their episodes in 1978. A few scattered
episodes, mostly black and white kinescopes, of these series exist from
the 1950s, 1960s, and early to mid-1970s. The CBS soaps Love of Life and
The Secret Storm, as well as several short-lived shows, suffered the
same fate.
ABC's One Life to Live and All My Children were originally owned by
their creator, Agnes Nixon, who chose to archive all episodes. However,
early episodes of AMC were only saved as black-and-white kinescopes
despite being produced and telecast in color. ABC purchased the shows in
late 1974; different sources report that Nixon's archive was either lost
in a fire or erased. A few black-and-white kinescopes of both series'
early years exist, as well as a few color episodes. ABC began full
archiving of these soaps at Nixon's insistence when they expanded from
30 minutes to an hour—AMC in 1977, and OLTL in 1978.
Most 1963–1970 episodes of ABC's longest-running General Hospital
survive because the series was then owned by Selmur Productions. Few
episodes from 1970 to 1977 were saved. Ryan's Hope premiered in 1975,
several years before ABC began saving all of its daytime programming,
but exists in its entirety as it was originally owned by Labine-Mayer
Productions.
Dark Shadows, created by Dan Curtis, which ran from 1966 to 1971, has
the distinction of being one of the few soap operas to have nearly all
of its original episodes preserved. As a result of kinescope, many
earlier episodes of which the master film was lost are still available.
However, episode #1219 was lost but reconstructed with an audio
recording for home video release.
Two long-running soaps have full archives: Days of Our Lives, which
premiered in 1965, and The Young and the Restless, which premiered in
1973. Both series were originally distributed by Screen Gems.
Interesting article on how Desi Arnaz invented syndication:

http://www.americanheritage.com/content/what-desi-wrought

But if the basic creative decisions had been made, the
business ones had not. CBS wanted the series done live in
New York. The East Coast was where the audience was, and
if the show was done in Hollywood, the East Coast would
have to see blurry kinescopes. Lucy and Desi wanted to stay
in Hollywood, so Desi negotiated. He suggested using their
production company, Desilu, to film the show ahead of time.
This solved the quality problem but would considerably
increase the production costs, originally budgeted at what
now seems a minuscule $19,500 an episode. Desi, picking a
figure out of thin air, guessed that the increase would
amount to $5,000.

After much hemming and hawing, Philip Morris and CBS agreed
to come up with an additional $2,000 each. But Lucy and
Desi, who were to be paid $2,500 each and own half the show,
would have to take a thousand-dollar salary cut between
them on each of the first thirty-nine episodes to make up
the difference.

Arnaz made a counteroffer. He and Lucy would take the salary
cut, provided CBS gave them sole ownership. Since in 1951
most television shows were done live and preserved only on
kinescopes, yesterdays TV shows, CBS thought, were worth
about the same as yesterdays newspapers. So CBS readily
agreed. The suits figured they weren't giving up much.

But Arnaz knew that he and Lucy weren't giving up much either.
In our income tax bracket, he explained, we might have ended
up with about $5,000 of the $39,000 we were losing [in
salary cuts]. So in effect, we were buying the other half
of the series for $5,000.

That, of course, turned out to be the bargain of the century.
Because I Love Lucy was filmed, not performed live, for the
first time in television, there was something worth selling
after the original broadcast was over, and because I Love
Lucy turned into one of the biggest hits in the history of
show business, there was no lack of offers to buy.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-26 03:29:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
No, but they still have budgets.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-03-26 04:03:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
No, but they still have budgets.
For instance, classic era animation cels were routinely scraped and reused.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Dimensional Traveler
2018-03-26 04:34:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:28:50 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by Juho Julkunen
@gmail.com says...
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
The benefits of socialized television.
Tapes cost money for private broadcasters, too.
But private broadcasters aren't subject to government austerity
programs.
Just stockholder dividend boosting programs.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Greg Goss
2018-03-25 19:15:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
I remember an interview back about 2008. The last guy who could
operate the old VTRs that shows had been recorded onto was about to
retire. The machines were old and flakey, and this guy had learned
over time how to macguyver his way past their various breakdowns.

So they had one guy running the transfers, and three producer types
going over titles and casting and etc trying to decide which specific
shows to preserve in the limited time before the technician's
retirement.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Anthony Frost
2018-03-26 10:45:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
I remember an interview back about 2008. The last guy who could
operate the old VTRs that shows had been recorded onto was about to
retire. The machines were old and flakey, and this guy had learned
over time how to macguyver his way past their various breakdowns.
I find that hard to believe of BBC transfers. Quad machines were still
in use around the various UK broadcasting services in 1990 and there are
still a lot of us around with ops and maintenance abilities and quite a
few machines tucked away in odd corners.

While quad tapes, and more importantly storage for them, did cost money
a bigger expense leading to re-use was repeat fees. The standard Equity
contract up until VHS became widespread allowed for the original
transmission and two repeats. To get a third repeat *every* actor in the
production had to be contacted for permission and paid their entire
original fee again. Some actors refused permission, finding extras who
had done a few background parts then dropped out of the business was a
nightmare, and there was the perennial problem of "Why are there so many
repeats on TV?" with a helping of "why don't we spend the money on new
production".

Anthony (Ex BBC and ITV)
Peter Trei
2018-03-26 13:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Frost
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
(Cf. a lot of early episodes of Doctor Who, which were recorded
over because tapes cost money.)
I remember an interview back about 2008. The last guy who could
operate the old VTRs that shows had been recorded onto was about to
retire. The machines were old and flakey, and this guy had learned
over time how to macguyver his way past their various breakdowns.
I find that hard to believe of BBC transfers. Quad machines were still
in use around the various UK broadcasting services in 1990 and there are
still a lot of us around with ops and maintenance abilities and quite a
few machines tucked away in odd corners.
While quad tapes, and more importantly storage for them, did cost money
a bigger expense leading to re-use was repeat fees. The standard Equity
contract up until VHS became widespread allowed for the original
transmission and two repeats. To get a third repeat *every* actor in the
production had to be contacted for permission and paid their entire
original fee again. Some actors refused permission, finding extras who
had done a few background parts then dropped out of the business was a
nightmare, and there was the perennial problem of "Why are there so many
repeats on TV?" with a helping of "why don't we spend the money on new
production".
Anthony (Ex BBC and ITV)
Interesting. There's a lot of old BBC/ITV SF and telefantasy I'd love to see
again, but most are lost (eg, 'Out of the Unknown').

pt
Jack Bohn
2018-03-26 16:17:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Interesting. There's a lot of old BBC/ITV SF and telefantasy I'd love to see 
again, but most are lost (eg, 'Out of the Unknown'). 
America has its share of lost sftv: episodes of Space Cadet and Space Patrol, and most of Captain Video, whose network, Dumont, went bankrupt, and salvaged the kinescopes for the silver in the emulsion.

(The lack of esteem entertainment is held in can be seen by the possibly apocryphal story of a young Walt Disney trying to find a distributor for his early cartoons. One offered a ridiculously low price per foot, (most likely per time, but the conversion factor between the two was looser for silent movies, so feet was the verifiable number, but it makes them sounds like literal yardgoods) Disney complained that raw filmstock cost him more than that per foot, and the distributor agreed that the film would have been worth more if it hadn't been all scribbled over.)
--
-Jack
Michael R N Dolbear
2018-03-26 00:16:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.

Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.

There is a book about a project to digitise historic 18th century London
playbills where the data was available on punched tape but it was found
cheaper to re-key it twice! using IBM golfballs and OCR the result.

There is an author-published ebook where the text came from the submitted MS
but the corrections made on the page proofs had been lost and it shows.

Hence the near-universal use of OCR of the pbook pages.
--
Mike D
J. Clarke
2018-03-26 02:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Post by J. Clarke
There is a book about a project to digitise historic 18th century London
playbills where the data was available on punched tape but it was found
cheaper to re-key it twice! using IBM golfballs and OCR the result.
There is an author-published ebook where the text came from the submitted MS
but the corrections made on the page proofs had been lost and it shows.
Hence the near-universal use of OCR of the pbook pages.
Cryptoengineer
2018-03-27 00:35:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Its a pity, yes, but I think excusable up through the introduction of
the Kindle in 2007.

Why store a tape or floppy which will probably be unusable in 5-10
years, when you're *already* storing the things that count: the
printing plates? Those you know you'll be able to reuse, and the
digital media was redundant.

Up to that point, reading books on electronic devices was the
province of geekish weirdos, and portable devices really sucked
at it - remember Palm Pilots? Everyone else preferred Real Books.

pt
J. Clarke
2018-03-27 02:52:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 19:35:11 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Its a pity, yes, but I think excusable up through the introduction of
the Kindle in 2007.
Why store a tape or floppy which will probably be unusable in 5-10
years, when you're *already* storing the things that count: the
printing plates? Those you know you'll be able to reuse, and the
digital media was redundant.
Up to that point, reading books on electronic devices was the
province of geekish weirdos, and portable devices really sucked
at it - remember Palm Pilots? Everyone else preferred Real Books.
Actually a Palm Pilot worked fine for the purpose. What it was
missing was the wireless connectivity.

Note--for certain values of "Palm Pilot". The Sonys were the best of
the Palm devices.
Kevrob
2018-03-27 02:58:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 19:35:11 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Its a pity, yes, but I think excusable up through the introduction of
the Kindle in 2007.
Why store a tape or floppy which will probably be unusable in 5-10
years, when you're *already* storing the things that count: the
printing plates? Those you know you'll be able to reuse, and the
digital media was redundant.
Up to that point, reading books on electronic devices was the
province of geekish weirdos, and portable devices really sucked
at it - remember Palm Pilots? Everyone else preferred Real Books.
Actually a Palm Pilot worked fine for the purpose. What it was
missing was the wireless connectivity.
Note--for certain values of "Palm Pilot". The Sonys were the best of
the Palm devices.
I worked in a bookstore that sold the Sony Data Discman, along
with the discs, which were mostly reference books. The tech
was interesting for the time, but content was so limited we
couldn't move them.

Kevin R

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Data_Discman
J. Clarke
2018-03-27 03:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 19:35:11 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Its a pity, yes, but I think excusable up through the introduction of
the Kindle in 2007.
Why store a tape or floppy which will probably be unusable in 5-10
years, when you're *already* storing the things that count: the
printing plates? Those you know you'll be able to reuse, and the
digital media was redundant.
Up to that point, reading books on electronic devices was the
province of geekish weirdos, and portable devices really sucked
at it - remember Palm Pilots? Everyone else preferred Real Books.
Actually a Palm Pilot worked fine for the purpose. What it was
missing was the wireless connectivity.
Note--for certain values of "Palm Pilot". The Sonys were the best of
the Palm devices.
I worked in a bookstore that sold the Sony Data Discman, along
with the discs, which were mostly reference books. The tech
was interesting for the time, but content was so limited we
couldn't move them.
Kevin R
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Data_Discman
That would have been before Palm Pilots. I had two Clies. For the
time they were marvelous machines.
Peter Trei
2018-03-27 13:08:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 19:35:11 -0500, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:28 +0100, "Michael R N Dolbear"
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
There hasn't been any real excuse for a long time. Phototypesetters
that required that the book be produced in electronic form started
coming into use in the '70s. Any book published in the last 40 years
or so was in electronic form at some point--from there making an ebook
out of it should be fairly easy to automate.
Unfortunately these were in proprietary non-standard formats and were
usually discarded when the book went out of print.
Like I said, there's no excuse. That publishers are stupidly cheap is
not a justification.
Its a pity, yes, but I think excusable up through the introduction of
the Kindle in 2007.
Why store a tape or floppy which will probably be unusable in 5-10
years, when you're *already* storing the things that count: the
printing plates? Those you know you'll be able to reuse, and the
digital media was redundant.
Up to that point, reading books on electronic devices was the
province of geekish weirdos, and portable devices really sucked
at it - remember Palm Pilots? Everyone else preferred Real Books.
Actually a Palm Pilot worked fine for the purpose. What it was
missing was the wireless connectivity.
Note--for certain values of "Palm Pilot". The Sonys were the best of
the Palm devices.
I worked in a bookstore that sold the Sony Data Discman, along
with the discs, which were mostly reference books. The tech
was interesting for the time, but content was so limited we
couldn't move them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Data_Discman
I remember that. It was a product before its
time. I sometimes wonder if its failure in the marketplace was
a reason it took so long for someone else to try.

pt
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-22 21:41:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise."
Sibling!
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?

Maybe I should wait for you to reread it before I ask for a
recommendation.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Robert Woodward
2018-03-23 17:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise."
Sibling!
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?
Well, it is her first book. I am afraid to say anything about the plot,
because I am not certain that I am not confusing it with another book
(whose title escapes me at the moment, but that one is somewhere on my
shelves).
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-23 18:28:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise."
Sibling!
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?
Well, it is her first book. I am afraid to say anything about the plot,
because I am not certain that I am not confusing it with another book
(whose title escapes me at the moment, but that one is somewhere on my
shelves).
Hmmmm.

I had never heard of it before. I had heard of _River Rats_,
which is apparently set in a post-apocalyptic world, and there
were so many of those in the 1950s, and I got so tired of them,
that I've never attempted to read that one.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Chris Buckley
2018-03-25 17:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?
Well, it is her first book. I am afraid to say anything about the plot,
because I am not certain that I am not confusing it with another book
(whose title escapes me at the moment, but that one is somewhere on my
shelves).
Hmmmm.
I had never heard of it before. I had heard of _River Rats_,
which is apparently set in a post-apocalyptic world, and there
were so many of those in the 1950s, and I got so tired of them,
that I've never attempted to read that one.
I just re-read _The Serpent's Egg_, sparked by this thread and the
fact that I had no memory of it at all, despite having read it. I
really enjoyed _A College of Magics_ (on my favorites bookcase), and
liked her other books.

Unfortunately, it basically deserved its lack of impact on me. Lots of
typical first novel flaws. Characters are good or evil - no complexity
in either character or actions. (Not quite true; the Queen exhibits
complexity towards the end, and it is quite disconcerting.) At times I
wasn't sure that it wasn't being deliberately farcical. But no, it just
didn't have the depth that some of its subplots (too many of them) deserved.

Chris
Robert Woodward
2018-03-24 17:09:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise."
Sibling!
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?
Well, it is her first book. I am afraid to say anything about the plot,
because I am not certain that I am not confusing it with another book
(whose title escapes me at the moment, but that one is somewhere on my
shelves).
To follow up, that other book is _The Panorama Egg_ by A. E. Silas(1).
In that title, a person looks into the hole of such an egg and finds
himself in the world inside that egg (I will say no more). In _The
Serpent's Egg_, the egg in question is a crystal that acts like a
scrying device (amongst other things) and if you work with it
carelessly, you find yourself in a world (or at least a beach), probably
inside (as for your body, you just died in the outside world).

As for _The Serpent's Egg_, this is set in a kingdom (pre-gunpowder,
probably feudal) with a ruling queen who appears to be oblivious to the
intrigues of an ambitious noble. I haven't finished it; but I will say I
see some plot problems. There is a letter, important for plot reasons,
that really shouldn't exist (there's even a comment on why that noble
would ever put something like that down in writing). It might had been a
forgery, but he acts like he knows it exists and it would be far more
effective if he didn't. Anyway, our heroes are trying to figure out a
way to get that letter into the Queen's hands and they completely ignore
a possible method that is sitting right in front of them (and which had
already been used to pass messages to and from a prisoner).

1) Attention James Nicholl - according to the ISFDB, A. E. Silas is Ann
Elizabeth Silas; _The Panorama Egg_ is her only SF novel; and it was
published in 1978. I think she belongs on your erasure list if she isn't
already there.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
James Nicoll
2018-03-24 17:34:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
It is all part of the erasure of the past. You can't publish new books
if the old books are still around using press time and shelf space.
BTW, that is why my answer to people who ask why I have thousands of
books in my collection is "because if I ever want to reread any, I can -
they would be impossible to find otherwise."
Sibling!
Post by Robert Woodward
Perhaps I should reread
Caroline Stevermere's _The Serpent's Egg_ to see if it is a forgotten
treasure.
Hmmmm. I never heard of that one, but I dote on her para-Regency
novels (with and without Wrede) and her two college of magic
books, whereof I desperately want to see the other two as soon as
she writes them. I observe _TSE_ is available from Amazon for
several times what I usually spend for a used book from Amazon
(e.g., $1.98 plus s/h). Can you remember anything about it?
Well, it is her first book. I am afraid to say anything about the plot,
because I am not certain that I am not confusing it with another book
(whose title escapes me at the moment, but that one is somewhere on my
shelves).
To follow up, that other book is _The Panorama Egg_ by A. E. Silas(1).
In that title, a person looks into the hole of such an egg and finds
himself in the world inside that egg (I will say no more). In _The
Serpent's Egg_, the egg in question is a crystal that acts like a
scrying device (amongst other things) and if you work with it
carelessly, you find yourself in a world (or at least a beach), probably
inside (as for your body, you just died in the outside world).
As for _The Serpent's Egg_, this is set in a kingdom (pre-gunpowder,
probably feudal) with a ruling queen who appears to be oblivious to the
intrigues of an ambitious noble. I haven't finished it; but I will say I
see some plot problems. There is a letter, important for plot reasons,
that really shouldn't exist (there's even a comment on why that noble
would ever put something like that down in writing). It might had been a
forgery, but he acts like he knows it exists and it would be far more
effective if he didn't. Anyway, our heroes are trying to figure out a
way to get that letter into the Queen's hands and they completely ignore
a possible method that is sitting right in front of them (and which had
already been used to pass messages to and from a prisoner).
1) Attention James Nicholl - according to the ISFDB, A. E. Silas is Ann
Elizabeth Silas; _The Panorama Egg_ is her only SF novel; and it was
published in 1978. I think she belongs on your erasure list if she isn't
already there.
Thank you!
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
David Johnston
2018-03-22 17:24:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
I got to point out that There And Back Again has a bit of legal problem
that probably explains why it isn't in print and won't be as long as The
Lord of The Rings isn't in the public domain.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-03-22 17:47:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Johnston
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
I got to point out that There And Back Again has a bit of legal problem
that probably explains why it isn't in print and won't be as long as The
Lord of The Rings isn't in the public domain.
And saying these books can't be bought is not to say they are not available.
I'm sure there are samizdat epubs for most of them. Not that I would
advocate that of course.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Peter Trei
2018-03-22 18:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by David Johnston
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
I got to point out that There And Back Again has a bit of legal problem
that probably explains why it isn't in print and won't be as long as The
Lord of The Rings isn't in the public domain.
And saying these books can't be bought is not to say they are not available.
I'm sure there are samizdat epubs for most of them. Not that I would
advocate that of course.
...and most are available used. I bought 'There and back again' for 10 bucks
online a few months ago.

pt
Steve Coltrin
2018-03-22 23:57:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
begin fnord
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
And saying these books can't be bought is not to say they are not available.
I'm sure there are samizdat epubs for most of them. Not that I would
advocate that of course.
Nine times out of ten used copies can be had cheaply and perfectly legally.
--
Steve Coltrin ***@omcl.org Google Groups killfiled here
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
Ahasuerus
2018-03-22 19:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
[snip-snip]
Post by James Nicoll
I tend to expect that many others will love the same books that I
do. I have been proved wrong again and again. [snip]
That answers the question, doesn't it? Most people just don't
appreciate finer things in life like Vegemite and Clark Ashton Smith.
If they choose, heaven help them, peanut butter and H. P. Lovecraft
instead ... well, I say let them get what they so richly deserve!
Dimensional Traveler
2018-03-22 21:10:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
[snip-snip]
Post by James Nicoll
I tend to expect that many others will love the same books that I
do. I have been proved wrong again and again. [snip]
That answers the question, doesn't it? Most people just don't
appreciate finer things in life like Vegemite and Clark Ashton Smith.
If they choose, heaven help them, peanut butter and H. P. Lovecraft
instead ... well, I say let them get what they so richly deserve!
Full stomachs with which to face the end of the world?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Ahasuerus
2018-03-23 00:38:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
[snip-snip]
Post by James Nicoll
I tend to expect that many others will love the same books that I
do. I have been proved wrong again and again. [snip]
That answers the question, doesn't it? Most people just don't
appreciate finer things in life like Vegemite and Clark Ashton Smith.
If they choose, heaven help them, peanut butter and H. P. Lovecraft
instead ... well, I say let them get what they so richly deserve!
Full stomachs with which to face the end of the world?
If they are lucky, they will go mad first!
Lynn McGuire
2018-03-22 21:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.

Lynn
James Nicoll
2018-03-23 13:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.
At least some of the time, non-market factors come into it. See John
M. Ford. Or they do but it's Stupid Publisher Tricks, for which the author
pays.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Ahasuerus
2018-03-23 13:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.
At least some of the time, non-market factors come into it. See John
M. Ford. Or they do but it's Stupid Publisher Tricks, for which the
author pays.
Estate management and publishing peculiarities can be downright,
well, peculiar. For example, consider the case of R. A. Lafferty's
estate, which reportedly includes over a dozen unpublished novels:

http://floggingbabel.blogspot.com/2011/04/r-lafferty-saved-from-drowning.html
http://locusmag.com/2016/03/paul-di-filippo-reviews-r-a-lafferty/
Dan ONeill
2018-03-23 14:50:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Estate management and publishing peculiarities can be downright,
well, peculiar. For example, consider the case of R. A. Lafferty's
http://floggingbabel.blogspot.com/2011/04/r-lafferty-saved-from-drowning.html
http://locusmag.com/2016/03/paul-di-filippo-reviews-r-a-lafferty/
Centipede Press, http://www.centipedepress.com/

is in the process of publishing a Lafferty series, currently on volume 4. I have no idea what their relationship is with his estate, or whether they plan this to be an integral edition.

It looks like the earlier volumes are already sold out.

d.o.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-23 14:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.
At least some of the time, non-market factors come into it. See John
M. Ford.
And H. Beam Piper, back in the day.
Post by James Nicoll
Or they do but it's Stupid Publisher Tricks, for which the author
pays.
Examples?
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
James Nicoll
2018-03-23 14:57:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.
At least some of the time, non-market factors come into it. See John
M. Ford.
And H. Beam Piper, back in the day.
Post by James Nicoll
Or they do but it's Stupid Publisher Tricks, for which the author
pays.
Examples?
IIRC what killed Tanith Lee in North America was her publisher deciding
to market one of her books as horror just as the horror market was imploding
again, then concluding the issue was with her and not how the book was sold.

I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.

As I recall, the first print run of Charles R. Saunder's Imaro got
pulped because DAW used a blurb that attracted the ire of the extremely
litigious Burroughs estate.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-23 18:30:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
The market for things is horribly unfair and biased. And money plays in
there somewhere.
At least some of the time, non-market factors come into it. See John
M. Ford.
And H. Beam Piper, back in the day.
Post by James Nicoll
Or they do but it's Stupid Publisher Tricks, for which the author
pays.
Examples?
IIRC what killed Tanith Lee in North America was her publisher deciding
to market one of her books as horror just as the horror market was imploding
again, then concluding the issue was with her and not how the book was sold.
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
Sir, you have just won the Meiosis Award of the Decade.
Post by James Nicoll
As I recall, the first print run of Charles R. Saunder's Imaro got
pulped because DAW used a blurb that attracted the ire of the extremely
litigious Burroughs estate.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Moriarty
2018-03-25 21:57:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, March 24, 2018 at 1:57:19 AM UTC+11, James Nicoll wrote:

<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for a fantasy novel, it's ok.

-Moriarty
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-25 22:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.

You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?

As James pointed out a while back, the girl in the white 1940s
prom dress should actually have been wearing all black, including
a hooded cloak. And I mentioned that characteristic black several
times in the text, including the moment when (having lost the
Sight) she said she'd never wear the black again.

Oh well. Bill Gill made me a rather better cover, combining his
own kitchen sink and a mounted knight by Howard Pyle (early 20th
century and, AFAIK, out of copyright).
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Moriarty
2018-03-25 23:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.
You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?
No, I didn't. I'm curious now as to what it was.

-Moriarty
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-26 01:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.
You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?
No, I didn't. I'm curious now as to what it was.
I'm trying to remember if I ever knew what it was, or if somebody
just told me "that cover's now been used for an entirely
different book."

...

Just searched through all the stuff I still have on disk
regarding _TIL_ and found,
Post by Moriarty
I don't blame you. *I* was put off by the cover. (Which, so I'm
told, later got re-used for the cover of some kind of historical
novel, which I hope it fitted better than it did _IL_.)
So if I ever knew, I've forgotten.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Moriarty
2018-03-26 03:47:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.
You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?
No, I didn't. I'm curious now as to what it was.
I'm trying to remember if I ever knew what it was, or if somebody
just told me "that cover's now been used for an entirely
different book."
...
Just searched through all the stuff I still have on disk
regarding _TIL_ and found,
Post by Moriarty
I don't blame you. *I* was put off by the cover. (Which, so I'm
told, later got re-used for the cover of some kind of historical
novel, which I hope it fitted better than it did _IL_.)
So if I ever knew, I've forgotten.
A bit of detective work yields...

Loading Image...

Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.

-Moriarty
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-26 04:00:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.
You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?
No, I didn't. I'm curious now as to what it was.
I'm trying to remember if I ever knew what it was, or if somebody
just told me "that cover's now been used for an entirely
different book."
...
Just searched through all the stuff I still have on disk
regarding _TIL_ and found,
Post by Moriarty
I don't blame you. *I* was put off by the cover. (Which, so I'm
told, later got re-used for the cover of some kind of historical
novel, which I hope it fitted better than it did _IL_.)
So if I ever knew, I've forgotten.
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.

That's Russian for OMG.

I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."

So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-03-26 04:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by James Nicoll
I don't think the Baen cover for The Interior Life was helpful.
I actually quite like it. As Dorothy has pointed out, it bears little
resemblance to anything actually in the book, but as generic artwork for
a fantasy novel, it's ok.
Yeah, but.
You do know it got recycled (so I was told) for an entirely
different novel later?
No, I didn't. I'm curious now as to what it was.
I'm trying to remember if I ever knew what it was, or if somebody
just told me "that cover's now been used for an entirely
different book."
...
Just searched through all the stuff I still have on disk
regarding _TIL_ and found,
Post by Moriarty
I don't blame you. *I* was put off by the cover. (Which, so I'm
told, later got re-used for the cover of some kind of historical
novel, which I hope it fitted better than it did _IL_.)
So if I ever knew, I've forgotten.
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
The Baen cover for _Hell On High_ ended up as a Czech beer label..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Lawrence Watt-Evans
2018-03-26 08:23:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.

Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."

I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar.
See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-26 14:18:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Peter Trei
2018-03-26 14:49:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.

pt
Lawrence Watt-Evans
2018-03-26 15:23:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar.
See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-03-26 15:34:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
David Johnston
2018-03-26 16:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
It wouldn't need to. "Tolkien" is not in itself a trademark.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
2018-03-26 20:33:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
Oh.

I don't know whether they did; Russian trademark law gets kind of
sketchy.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar.
See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
David Johnston
2018-03-26 22:24:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
Oh.
I don't know whether they did; Russian trademark law gets kind of
sketchy.
It might not be the publishing line anyway. Could just be a publicity
blurb likening Dunsany to Tolkien.
Ahasuerus
2018-03-26 22:40:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
Oh.
I don't know whether they did; Russian trademark law gets kind of
sketchy.
It might not be the publishing line anyway. Could just be a publicity
blurb likening Dunsany to Tolkien.
According to https://fantlab.ru/series181 , the series consisted of
5 omnibuses which collected novels and stories by:

Lord Dunsany
James Branch Cabell
Clark Ashton Smith
George MacDonald
David Lindsay
Charles G. Finney
C. L. Moore

Good choices, but the quality of the translation apparently varied,
e.g. their version of George MacDonald's _Lilith_ is said to be a
draft "retelling" used without the translator's permission.
J. Clarke
2018-03-27 02:55:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 16:33:40 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Peter Trei
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Juho Julkunen
In article
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
Oh dear. This just gets worse, doesn't it.
Still in copyright (until 2020) in the US. Don't know about other countries.
Russian publishers really do pay for stuff, you know. I've made a lot
of money from Russian editions. It's probably a perfectly legitimate
translation of the Dunsany.
I can believe that. What I can't believe is that the Tolkien
Estate would license its name for a line of Russian reprints.
Oh.
I don't know whether they did; Russian trademark law gets kind of
sketchy.
And it might not have anything to do with Tolkien. Might be the
publishing house was started by Joe Tolkin or some such.
Ahasuerus
2018-03-26 16:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Moriarty
2018-03-26 21:16:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". That page also acknowledges Tom Kidd as the illustrator and I can think of far worse books for "The Interior Life" to share a cover with.

A browse through the links on the side of the page shows quite a smorgasbord of fantasy and SF translated into Russian.

Lawrence may be interested in this page:

https://fantlab.ru/autor648

-Moriarty
Lawrence Watt-Evans
2018-03-26 21:24:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 14:16:50 -0700 (PDT), Moriarty
Post by Moriarty
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". That page also acknowledges Tom Kidd as the illustrator and I can think of far worse books for "The Interior Life" to share a cover with.
A browse through the links on the side of the page shows quite a smorgasbord of fantasy and SF translated into Russian.
https://fantlab.ru/autor648
That's surprisingly complete.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar.
See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
Ahasuerus
2018-03-26 21:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 14:16:50 -0700 (PDT), Moriarty
Post by Moriarty
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". That
page also acknowledges Tom Kidd as the illustrator and I can think of
far worse books for "The Interior Life" to share a cover with.
A browse through the links on the side of the page shows quite a
smorgasbord of fantasy and SF translated into Russian.
https://fantlab.ru/autor648
That's surprisingly complete.
Fantlab's author bibliographies tend to be comprehensive due to the
way they do things. While we (the ISFDB) are book-centric, they are
author-centric. Each author is assigned a volunteer "curator" who
monitors "his" authors' output and keeps the data up to date. Fantlab
won't create an author page until a curator has been assigned.

We, on the other hand, do not have curators. We just enter information
about books, magazine, etc into the database and let the software
create author pages. Once an author page has been created, an editor
can add biographical data, but it's strictly optional.

I wonder if this difference -- "top down" vs. "from the ground up" --
may say something about the people who run the two sites. Not that it
stops us from collaborating with Fantab (and SFE3 and Locus and Bill
Contento and Galactic Central etc), of course.
Ahasuerus
2018-03-26 21:31:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
Dimensional Traveler
2018-03-26 21:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
"Pick you ancestors" would have been better.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-03-26 22:00:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
"Pick you ancestors" would have been better.
Frederic, in this chapel are ancestors: you cannot deny that.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Robert Carnegie
2018-03-26 22:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
Andre Norton had "Forerunner". "Stargate" on TV had "Ancients".
"Babylon 5" had "First Ones". Is there a favoured term overall,
or is (ironically) originality encouraged?
Dimensional Traveler
2018-03-26 22:37:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
Andre Norton had "Forerunner". "Stargate" on TV had "Ancients".
"Babylon 5" had "First Ones". Is there a favoured term overall,
or is (ironically) originality encouraged?
Encouraged by who?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Robert Carnegie
2018-03-29 18:33:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Lawrence Watt-Evans
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
A bit of detective work yields...
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
"Tolkeen."
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
Why undoubtedly ripped off? The Russians started paying attention to
international copyright laws in the 1970s.
Anyway, the yellow banner says "Tolkien," and something too small to
read, but below that it says "Lord Dunseni," and the title at the
bottom is "Dotch Korolya Elfov," which is "The King of Elfland's
Daughter."
I'm guessing "Tolkin" is the imprint/line.
https://fantlab.ru/edition15958 says "Tolkin. Predshestvenniki",
i.e. "Tolkien. Forerunners", an imprint owned by two Russian
publishers, "AST" and "Ermak". The book is an omnibus edition of
_The King of Elfland’s Daughter_, _Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of
Shadow Valley_ (aka _The Chronicles of Don Rodriguez_) and 25 short
stories.
Google translate says "Predecessors" rather than "Forerunners". [snip]
Predecessors, precursors, forerunners -- pick your poison!
Andre Norton had "Forerunner". "Stargate" on TV had "Ancients".
"Babylon 5" had "First Ones". Is there a favoured term overall,
or is (ironically) originality encouraged?
Encouraged by who?
The audience, I suppose. And thesaurus salesmen. Maybe it's
suspiciously commercial that even a single writer on any subject
is told off for using one completely adequate word ten times
instead of several different words that mean the same thing.

Explorers investigating a dead, highly advanced civilisation
recurs in science fiction, I suppose because if the highly
advanced civilisation isn't dead, then the story rather quickly
stops being about the explorers that we were supposed to be
interested in, and is all about the advanced civilisation instead.
David DeLaney
2018-04-02 10:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Explorers investigating a dead, highly advanced civilisation
recurs in science fiction, I suppose because if the highly
advanced civilisation isn't dead, then the story rather quickly
stops being about the explorers that we were supposed to be
interested in, and is all about the advanced civilisation instead.
So does the variant 'explorers investigating artifacts created BY a presumably-
dead, highly-advanced civilization'. Sheffield;s Summertide series, e.g.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Steve Coltrin
2018-03-26 17:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
begin fnord
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Moriarty
https://www.litmir.me/data/Book/0/6000/6525/BC4_1490513637.jpg
Either TIL had a Russian translation, or that's it.
Bozhemoi.
That's Russian for OMG.
I tried to learn Russian once, and still remember bits of the
Cyrillic alphabet. The large-print name at the top of the cover
reads "TOLKEN."
So that is neither _The Interior Life_ nor some kind of
historical novel, but a ripped-off cover for an undoubtedly
ripped-off work by Tolkien. I can't decipher the rest of the
Russian; can anybody?
The next (legible) line is "Lord Dunsany"; the last one is "Daughter of
the King of the Elves". So despite the "Tolkin" at the top (possibly a
series statement), this appears to be a translation of _The King of
Elfland's Daughter_.
--
Steve Coltrin ***@omcl.org Google Groups killfiled here
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
Michael F. Stemper
2018-03-23 16:39:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
I don't know, but a couple of them went on my "buy us " list. Thanks.
--
Michael F. Stemper
I feel more like I do now than I did when I came in.
James Nicoll
2018-03-23 16:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by James Nicoll
Why the Hell Are These Books Out of Print?
https://www.tor.com/2018/03/22/why-the-hell-are-these-books-out-of-print/
I don't know, but a couple of them went on my "buy us " list. Thanks.
You are welcome! Although I am not sure how much of a favour I am doing
given most of the books are OOP...
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Loading...