Fine Press Classics: Genesis, The Book of Jonah and The Song of Songs
Talk Folio Society Devotees
Join LibraryThing to post.
2folio_books
Well spotted. Very strongly tempted. The low limitation makes it more attractive. Just a bit too soon after the Christmas Collection to let me leap in immediately. I'll see how the sales go.
3gmacaree
How serendipitous that I checked this forum before making my Autumn/Christmas order today. I'll be buying.
5edgeworn
I've placed my order for the set. A wonderful selection of books, which hits the spot exactly for me.
6boldface
"300 copies from the limitation of 750."
So presumably they've only printed 300 at the moment and if it does well they'll print a few more but if it flops they can cut their losses because they don't want a Letterpress Shakespeare situation. I don't recall that they've been so up front about this in the past. It implies that, technically, any copies beyond 300 will be a second impression.
The books look great, though. It looks like I'll have to reduce my children's inheritance by £300.
So presumably they've only printed 300 at the moment and if it does well they'll print a few more but if it flops they can cut their losses because they don't want a Letterpress Shakespeare situation. I don't recall that they've been so up front about this in the past. It implies that, technically, any copies beyond 300 will be a second impression.
The books look great, though. It looks like I'll have to reduce my children's inheritance by £300.
7inkcentricity
I think it is more that they are offering 300 sets consisting of the three volumes with matching numbers. You can also buy each volume separately but all of these will be higher than 300/750 and the numbers will be random.
I think the 300 sets will sell very quickly. I will be interested to see what happens with the 450 single editions.
I think the 300 sets will sell very quickly. I will be interested to see what happens with the 450 single editions.
8sviswanathan
These look great. I hadn't placed my "Christmas Collection" order yet, so I'll probably scale that back and try to make room for this in my budget.
10MobyRichard
Might get The Book of Jonah. I love Eric Gill, but Song of Songs is far from his best work. Are they letterpress?
I can't tell.
I can't tell.
11terebinth
>10 MobyRichard:
I can't tell from the images, but not a chance, I'd say, especially in view of the engravings. Photography will have been the only remotely affordable way to produce accurate reproductions.
I can't tell from the images, but not a chance, I'd say, especially in view of the engravings. Photography will have been the only remotely affordable way to produce accurate reproductions.
12folio_books
>10 MobyRichard: Are they letterpress?
>11 terebinth: I can't tell from the images, but not a chance, I'd say, especially in view of the engravings.
The brochure arrived in the post. Nowhere is letterpress mentioned and I'd agree it's rather unlikely, especially at this price point. I'm now scanning it to send to Warwick so hopefully Devotees beyond these shores will get the chance to see it in advance of the snailmail delivery.
>11 terebinth: I can't tell from the images, but not a chance, I'd say, especially in view of the engravings.
The brochure arrived in the post. Nowhere is letterpress mentioned and I'd agree it's rather unlikely, especially at this price point. I'm now scanning it to send to Warwick so hopefully Devotees beyond these shores will get the chance to see it in advance of the snailmail delivery.
13c_schelle
Has anyone noticed the absence of the introductory discount? Furthermore all three cost the same as buying them seperately. This month is getting to expensive...
15MobyRichard
>11 terebinth:
>12 folio_books:
On the other hand, The Book of Jonah is only 20 pages, so seems doable. But I agree that no publisher would leave out a chance to scream "letterpress!" if it was letterpress.
>12 folio_books:
On the other hand, The Book of Jonah is only 20 pages, so seems doable. But I agree that no publisher would leave out a chance to scream "letterpress!" if it was letterpress.
16ironjaw
Just too soon. I was shocked to see this in the post today. At least give us some time to digest the Christmas catalogue and the The Count of Monte Cristo LE.
17folio_books
>16 ironjaw: Just too soon.
Yes, that's the way I'm thinking, Faisel. Just one damn thing after another. My bank account needs time to be topped up.
Yes, that's the way I'm thinking, Faisel. Just one damn thing after another. My bank account needs time to be topped up.
18Sorion
If I hadn't just subscribed to Arron and purchased from the Christmas collection this would be an insta purchase. As it is I'll need to give it 24 hours to marinate. Though I'm not gonna lie, it'll probably still happen. This is exactly the sort of thing I'm a total sucker for. Just read Jonah last night actually.
19folio_books
>18 Sorion: Though I'm not gonna lie, it'll probably still happen.
Oh, I doubt I've much of a hope of abstaining, just putting off the inevitable. Give me the Fine Press Classics, Lord, but not yet.
Oh, I doubt I've much of a hope of abstaining, just putting off the inevitable. Give me the Fine Press Classics, Lord, but not yet.
20HuxleyTheCat
I'll certainly get The Book of Jonah and Genesis, but I agree with >10 MobyRichard: and this work of Gill's doesn't float my boat. The question is whether to make a single order with the Christmas books, or buy those now and these two next month. It's at times like this that I really miss the collect in the dMR option, as £26 p&p for two small LEs is a bit excessive.
I'm delighted that they are continuing to publish projects like this.
I'm delighted that they are continuing to publish projects like this.
21wcarter
The brochure scanned by Glenn (folio_books) has been uploaded to the FSD wiki at-
http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/Groups:Folio_Society_Devotees#Folio_S...
This makes 2017 the year with the most LEs (9) and a total of 84 LEs in the modern program of LE publication.
See the statistics for LEs at:-
http://www.librarything.com/topic/192880
http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/Groups:Folio_Society_Devotees#Folio_S...
This makes 2017 the year with the most LEs (9) and a total of 84 LEs in the modern program of LE publication.
See the statistics for LEs at:-
http://www.librarything.com/topic/192880
22ultrarightist
I wonder where these books were printed and bound?
23HuxleyTheCat
It's a little strange, but apart from one mention of this project on Joe's Blog a few months ago, there is absolutely nothing on Folio's News and Blogs page. Perhaps omni-shambles marketing is only for the likes of sci-fi blockbusters and the latest Austen.
24LesMiserables
I believe Ms Omni Channels is the new Bond girl :-)
But yes, I had though that omni meant that all marketing channels were working not only simultaneously, but synchronised and integrated as a whole.
But yes, I had though that omni meant that all marketing channels were working not only simultaneously, but synchronised and integrated as a whole.
25HuxleyTheCat
>24 LesMiserables: Don't let her loose on the Aston Martin , she can't even put a book back in a slipcase.
26LesMiserables
>25 HuxleyTheCat:
I've had trouble myself in the past, but then again I was wise enough not to write them off, live, as MD! :-)
In charity, I suggest this was just on the spot throwaway jibberish, not meant and unintended.
I've had trouble myself in the past, but then again I was wise enough not to write them off, live, as MD! :-)
In charity, I suggest this was just on the spot throwaway jibberish, not meant and unintended.
27kdweber
Seems like a natural for letterpress but that would have doubled the price. Ordered the set.
28LolaWalser
Eric Gill (1882–1940) was the greatest artist-craftsman of the twentieth century, a master of wood engraving, stone sculpture and letter design.
I think there is a debate to be had about whether Gill was "the greatest" artist-craftsman of the 20th century--perhaps they forgot to add "in Britain"?
He is also a divisive figure, whose work combined his religious and erotic preoccupations in ways that remain controversial today.
Lol! Famous British understatement meets a terminal case of mealy mouth and shifty eyes.
This is very sad, Folio, some of your customers are VERY concerned about public figures' "distasteful ethics". The mind boggles at the thought of what effect the ethics of a serial philanderer/incestuous brother/incestuous father/sexual abuser of children and at least one dog* would have on such delicate righteous souls.
*The FAMILY dog, for pity's sake! Or is that actually a mitigating circumstance--at least he didn't skulk around assaulting other people's pooches...
Fun fact: Gill, multi-talented and profoundly opinionated on weirdest minutiae, fervently advocated the wearing of short tunics such as he designed himself, dispensing with underwear altogether, so that his glorious instruments of (pro)creation might enjoy a free, you might say swinging, lifestyle. It does make you wonder what, if anything, might have been different if someone had pushed the tighty whities, or at least boxers on him.
Renoir may have said that he painted with his cock, but at least everyone, himself included, understood it for a metaphor...
I think there is a debate to be had about whether Gill was "the greatest" artist-craftsman of the 20th century--perhaps they forgot to add "in Britain"?
He is also a divisive figure, whose work combined his religious and erotic preoccupations in ways that remain controversial today.
Lol! Famous British understatement meets a terminal case of mealy mouth and shifty eyes.
This is very sad, Folio, some of your customers are VERY concerned about public figures' "distasteful ethics". The mind boggles at the thought of what effect the ethics of a serial philanderer/incestuous brother/incestuous father/sexual abuser of children and at least one dog* would have on such delicate righteous souls.
*The FAMILY dog, for pity's sake! Or is that actually a mitigating circumstance--at least he didn't skulk around assaulting other people's pooches...
Fun fact: Gill, multi-talented and profoundly opinionated on weirdest minutiae, fervently advocated the wearing of short tunics such as he designed himself, dispensing with underwear altogether, so that his glorious instruments of (pro)creation might enjoy a free, you might say swinging, lifestyle. It does make you wonder what, if anything, might have been different if someone had pushed the tighty whities, or at least boxers on him.
Renoir may have said that he painted with his cock, but at least everyone, himself included, understood it for a metaphor...
29LesMiserables
I see the thunderclouds are gathering again.
Sigh.
Groundhog day.
Sigh.
Groundhog day.
31MobyRichard
>28 LolaWalser:
That kind of thinking always reminds me of the 'Golden Bough.'
Quantum entanglement aside, I would hope we would have progressed enough to stop believing in some kind of "sympathetic" connection
between an artist and his published work. For me, once a work is published it stands alone and can no longer be tainted by mere association with the author's name.
That kind of thinking always reminds me of the 'Golden Bough.'
Quantum entanglement aside, I would hope we would have progressed enough to stop believing in some kind of "sympathetic" connection
between an artist and his published work. For me, once a work is published it stands alone and can no longer be tainted by mere association with the author's name.
32parchmenths
>31 MobyRichard:. Mein Kampf?
33SF-72
> 32parchmenths
Mein Kampf is ugly in and of itself, and would be so if the author were unknown. If I look at the Gill illustrations for previous FS editions, I don't see sexual deviancy but beautiful art. Finding out about what he did in his life is unpleasant indeed, but considering that the art is beautiful and he doesn't profit from my buying these books, I consider the two as unconnected enough that his behaviour doesn't stop me from buying something he illustrated. It would be something different if either the art in question was about his sick sexuality or if I knew that I'm financing such a person's lifestyle.
Mein Kampf is ugly in and of itself, and would be so if the author were unknown. If I look at the Gill illustrations for previous FS editions, I don't see sexual deviancy but beautiful art. Finding out about what he did in his life is unpleasant indeed, but considering that the art is beautiful and he doesn't profit from my buying these books, I consider the two as unconnected enough that his behaviour doesn't stop me from buying something he illustrated. It would be something different if either the art in question was about his sick sexuality or if I knew that I'm financing such a person's lifestyle.
34Edal
No email notification and no brochure yet for me, so thanks for the enablement. They are duly ordered - the first new Folios to excite me in ages!
On the Great Gill debate, I think it fine for the Folio Society to comment that Gill was "the greatest artist-craftsman of the twentieth century, a master of wood engraving, stone sculpture and letter design", its just an informed subjective opinion in advertising blurb. I tend to share it.
I'm wondering what Renoir might have illustrated for the Golden Cockerel Press though....
On the Great Gill debate, I think it fine for the Folio Society to comment that Gill was "the greatest artist-craftsman of the twentieth century, a master of wood engraving, stone sculpture and letter design", its just an informed subjective opinion in advertising blurb. I tend to share it.
I'm wondering what Renoir might have illustrated for the Golden Cockerel Press though....
35folio_books
>33 SF-72: If I look at the Gill illustrations for previous FS editions, I don't see sexual deviancy but beautiful art. Finding out about what he did in his life is unpleasant indeed, but considering that the art is beautiful and he doesn't profit from my buying these books, I consider the two as unconnected enough that his behaviour doesn't stop me from buying something he illustrated.
Very well put. I am sickened by his sexual preferences and even more by his hypocrisy but you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
Very well put. I am sickened by his sexual preferences and even more by his hypocrisy but you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
36drasvola
>35 folio_books:
...you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
I share your same point of view.
...you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
I share your same point of view.
37MobyRichard
>32 parchmenths:
Change the name on the cover to Gandhi. Does that make Mein Kampf righteous? Again, I'm assuming
the art in question has already been published.
Change the name on the cover to Gandhi. Does that make Mein Kampf righteous? Again, I'm assuming
the art in question has already been published.
38LolaWalser
>30 parchmenths:
"Fifi, fetch me a weenie! No, not... um, never mind... continue..." :)
>35 folio_books:
I am sickened by his sexual preferences and even more by his hypocrisy but you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
People have generally not had a problem acknowledging his artistry (although you'll find opinion divided there as well, on purely aesthetic and art-historical grounds), it's the response to his vast, monstrously long and comprehensive sexual abuse of his family that has been lacking. (And, although I suppose this pales for most people in comparison to what he subjected his children to, it's notable that he slept with or tried to sleep with practically every woman* who came within his reach. Given that he championed commune-like living arrangements away from the less-discreet urban environment, this entailed all kinds of problems for his coworkers, collaborators, assistants and their families.)
*Homophobes will be delighted to hear that Gill details in his diaries a series of homosexual encounters as well.
So he was a naughty boy like so many great artists, right? It's a bit more complicated. The worst problem with Gill, for those who would ordinarily find no trouble excusing anything, is that unlike your garden-variety artistic no-goodnik with double standards for himself vs. the rest of the world, painting holy pictures for the Pope in the morning and chasing underage tail in the evening, even unlike a gangsta like Caravaggio, Gill simultaneously preached--and I do mean PREACHED, he fancied himself a pastor to his sheepish associates--his own unique concoction of theology, precepts for righteous living, spiritual development, sexual (very important!) and a myriad other relations--all of which, according to his own philosophy, would essentially impinge on, inform and mould his art. How deep this goes and how complicated are Gill's motivations--I shall admit to harbouring utmost scepticism as to the "purity" of his religious impulse at all--really can't be appreciated without reading his own words.
So there's the conundrum, for people gazing at his drawings and etchings of nudes (many of which represent his daughters at the same time as he was abusing them--a number of those drawings are accompanied by sketches and measurements of his penis in erect and flaccid states--yes, on the same page) and for people, especially if of the more conventional religious turn as they contemplate his carvings in the Westminster cathedral: can this unrepentant swine morally and spiritually uplift you? Is the one who subjected innocents in his care to a crucifixion of their own of the most obscene kind the one to make us see Christ on his way to the Cross?
Well--that is for every individual to answer for themselves.
"Fifi, fetch me a weenie! No, not... um, never mind... continue..." :)
>35 folio_books:
I am sickened by his sexual preferences and even more by his hypocrisy but you'd need to be narrow-minded not to acknowledge how great an artist he was.
People have generally not had a problem acknowledging his artistry (although you'll find opinion divided there as well, on purely aesthetic and art-historical grounds), it's the response to his vast, monstrously long and comprehensive sexual abuse of his family that has been lacking. (And, although I suppose this pales for most people in comparison to what he subjected his children to, it's notable that he slept with or tried to sleep with practically every woman* who came within his reach. Given that he championed commune-like living arrangements away from the less-discreet urban environment, this entailed all kinds of problems for his coworkers, collaborators, assistants and their families.)
*Homophobes will be delighted to hear that Gill details in his diaries a series of homosexual encounters as well.
So he was a naughty boy like so many great artists, right? It's a bit more complicated. The worst problem with Gill, for those who would ordinarily find no trouble excusing anything, is that unlike your garden-variety artistic no-goodnik with double standards for himself vs. the rest of the world, painting holy pictures for the Pope in the morning and chasing underage tail in the evening, even unlike a gangsta like Caravaggio, Gill simultaneously preached--and I do mean PREACHED, he fancied himself a pastor to his sheepish associates--his own unique concoction of theology, precepts for righteous living, spiritual development, sexual (very important!) and a myriad other relations--all of which, according to his own philosophy, would essentially impinge on, inform and mould his art. How deep this goes and how complicated are Gill's motivations--I shall admit to harbouring utmost scepticism as to the "purity" of his religious impulse at all--really can't be appreciated without reading his own words.
So there's the conundrum, for people gazing at his drawings and etchings of nudes (many of which represent his daughters at the same time as he was abusing them--a number of those drawings are accompanied by sketches and measurements of his penis in erect and flaccid states--yes, on the same page) and for people, especially if of the more conventional religious turn as they contemplate his carvings in the Westminster cathedral: can this unrepentant swine morally and spiritually uplift you? Is the one who subjected innocents in his care to a crucifixion of their own of the most obscene kind the one to make us see Christ on his way to the Cross?
Well--that is for every individual to answer for themselves.
39Sorion
>38 LolaWalser: Well done.
40folio_books
>38 LolaWalser:
Lola, knowing your fondness for dragging out fruitless exchanges of opposing opinions, I decline to get involved, having said all I intend to say upon the subject and not budging one iota from that opinion. My last word.
Fire away.
Lola, knowing your fondness for dragging out fruitless exchanges of opposing opinions, I decline to get involved, having said all I intend to say upon the subject and not budging one iota from that opinion. My last word.
Fire away.
41folio_books
Thought this was worth sharing. In response to my enquiry about how sales are going (trying to time my purchase to synch with my bank account) I am told sales are going well. Most people are buying the set of three "though there are a lot of folk just going for the Eric Gill volume too".
42LolaWalser
>40 folio_books:
I didn't realise I personally was disinvited from addressing your posts. Now I know. I also didn't realise I've incurred your displeasure by daring to post at all--given I'm far from being even moderately active here and have never (as far as I recall) in the past interacted with you at all.
Constructive measures: I'm going to block you and I suggest you do the same. You'll be spared seeing my posts and I won't mistake yours for conversation.
I hope this won't be interpreted as "fire". If I wasted my "fire" on every cranky old man who wants me to shut up I'd turn into an icicle in a day. :)
I didn't realise I personally was disinvited from addressing your posts. Now I know. I also didn't realise I've incurred your displeasure by daring to post at all--given I'm far from being even moderately active here and have never (as far as I recall) in the past interacted with you at all.
Constructive measures: I'm going to block you and I suggest you do the same. You'll be spared seeing my posts and I won't mistake yours for conversation.
I hope this won't be interpreted as "fire". If I wasted my "fire" on every cranky old man who wants me to shut up I'd turn into an icicle in a day. :)
44susanne-27
The set looks great, although some form of discount would be nice, even a small one. The only thing that prevents me from picking this up is the fear that they will turn this into a series which the completionist in me will want to buy as well. Do we know anything about possible future books? If they want to go through the entire bible... Damn you Jordan Peterson for getting me interested in this.
45folio_books
>44 susanne-27: Do we know anything about possible future books?
I'll call on others more knowledgeable about the output of Nonesuch and Golden Cockerel to answer that one. The way I see it, if either of those two has published other biblical works then the possibility exists for Folio to produce a facsimile. We've already had the Golden Cockerel/Eric Gill Four Gospels as an LE, of course.
I'll call on others more knowledgeable about the output of Nonesuch and Golden Cockerel to answer that one. The way I see it, if either of those two has published other biblical works then the possibility exists for Folio to produce a facsimile. We've already had the Golden Cockerel/Eric Gill Four Gospels as an LE, of course.
46HuxleyTheCat
>41 folio_books: I've never known them not to say that 'sales are going well', Glenn. I hope in this case though, that they are spot on and that Joe is given encouragement to continue with his niche projects.
47HuxleyTheCat
A point to note for anyone (like myself) not taking the set, when I put Genesis and Jonah in my basket, I'm getting two delivery charges, totalling £25.90; if I put the set of three in the basket instead, it reduces to £16.95.
48folio_books
>46 HuxleyTheCat: I've never known them not to say that 'sales are going well'
True. I don't like to think I'm quite that naïve :) The quote was a little out of context, though. You have to remember I was trying to gauge how long I could safely defer purchase and still get my hands on one of the sets of three. What he actually said was going well, but "I don't think there will be quite the monster rush we had with the Count of Monte Cristo." He added that not all of the advertising stuff had gone out yet due to postal strikes in various places. Overall I got the sense that I have at least a couple of months. Of course all this assumes there won't be a rush the day after the flyers reach their destinations, or ten minutes after I post this :) I'd be sorry to miss it but as long as there's still individual copies left (ie different limitation numbers) I won't be devastated. To be honest the main attraction in the set for me is David Jones "Jonah". Now that looks magnificent.
True. I don't like to think I'm quite that naïve :) The quote was a little out of context, though. You have to remember I was trying to gauge how long I could safely defer purchase and still get my hands on one of the sets of three. What he actually said was going well, but "I don't think there will be quite the monster rush we had with the Count of Monte Cristo." He added that not all of the advertising stuff had gone out yet due to postal strikes in various places. Overall I got the sense that I have at least a couple of months. Of course all this assumes there won't be a rush the day after the flyers reach their destinations, or ten minutes after I post this :) I'd be sorry to miss it but as long as there's still individual copies left (ie different limitation numbers) I won't be devastated. To be honest the main attraction in the set for me is David Jones "Jonah". Now that looks magnificent.
49folio_books
>47 HuxleyTheCat: if I put the set of three in the basket instead, it reduces to £16.95.
Another good reason (as if I needed one) for me to buy the set :)
Seriously, if I were you I'd put the order in by phone. I'm sure they'd see reason.
Another good reason (as if I needed one) for me to buy the set :)
Seriously, if I were you I'd put the order in by phone. I'm sure they'd see reason.
50HuxleyTheCat
>49 folio_books: Indeed. I'll leave it until after pay day, though, as this month has been quite heavy on purchases of LECs and books from other publishers already.
51davidjbrown10
>47 HuxleyTheCat: >49 folio_books: I ordered the set already, for a total of $495 ($450 + $45 delivery) to the US. Just testing the basket (as one does), the three ordered as separate items come to $555, ie $105 delivery instead of $45. So you could argue that the $60 saving forms a not-bad discount.
52wcarter
I have ordered the triplets. Just love these facsimiles of the intricately designed 19th. Century fine press books.
53LesMiserables
>35 folio_books:
Good point. We discussed Eric Gill on another thread. Incredibly talented. Terribly mixed up.
>43 folio_books:
It's that easy? I pray I am blocked too!
>52 wcarter:
I'm in two minds about this set. I can save a little by picking them up in the UK but when I look at the sets in closer detail I get the feeling that the money they are asking for such slim volumes might be better spent on The Four Gospels when I get round to buying it.
Also, is the essay included within each volume, or is it separate and stored within the solander box as a discrete item?
Good point. We discussed Eric Gill on another thread. Incredibly talented. Terribly mixed up.
>43 folio_books:
It's that easy? I pray I am blocked too!
>52 wcarter:
I'm in two minds about this set. I can save a little by picking them up in the UK but when I look at the sets in closer detail I get the feeling that the money they are asking for such slim volumes might be better spent on The Four Gospels when I get round to buying it.
Also, is the essay included within each volume, or is it separate and stored within the solander box as a discrete item?
54terebinth
>53 LesMiserables:
"Accompanying each volume is a four-page essay...", according to the website and prospectus, which I think has to mean the essays are separately laid in. I'd have hoped they would be, the facsimiles would be somewhat compromised otherwise to my way of thinking.
"Accompanying each volume is a four-page essay...", according to the website and prospectus, which I think has to mean the essays are separately laid in. I'd have hoped they would be, the facsimiles would be somewhat compromised otherwise to my way of thinking.
55LesMiserables
>54 terebinth:
Thanks. I would have thought that they would have included an image of this, so that one gets the fullest picture possible before purchasing.
Thanks. I would have thought that they would have included an image of this, so that one gets the fullest picture possible before purchasing.
56terebinth
>55 LesMiserables:
Yes, then I suppose if the essays are a single folded sheet there's just not much to see, as with the LEC's Monthly Letters.
I'm more tempted by these than I ought to be, given that I'm still clinging to a self-image as reader rather than collector of books. £3 or so a page is implausibly steep for reading, especially when there aren't all that many words on each: but they do look wonderful. I'd probably find the Paul Nash easiest to forgo, which is emphatically an admission rather than a criticism.
Yes, then I suppose if the essays are a single folded sheet there's just not much to see, as with the LEC's Monthly Letters.
I'm more tempted by these than I ought to be, given that I'm still clinging to a self-image as reader rather than collector of books. £3 or so a page is implausibly steep for reading, especially when there aren't all that many words on each: but they do look wonderful. I'd probably find the Paul Nash easiest to forgo, which is emphatically an admission rather than a criticism.
58affle
My books were delivered bright and early today, and I can confirm that the essays are but a single folded sheet, comprising a title page, some front matter, and two pages of text. The front matter does say something that I had not previously understood: 'The first three facsimiles issued by the Folio Society in the Fine Press Classics series are all Old Testament texts,...', that is, that there are more of this kind of thing to come. To which I can only say, judged by my first reaction to these, jolly good.
59affle
Some production information: all three books are printed by Memminger, and cloth bound by Lachenmeier (the top team in my view); and are on Corolla Book Laid Ivory paper.
62ohrus
>38 LolaWalser:
Just wanted to chime in with an appreciation of your posting. Despite the groans and gross glossing of some, this bears repeating over and over again. Well said.
There is no shortage of great art in the world. He receives my blind eye.
Just wanted to chime in with an appreciation of your posting. Despite the groans and gross glossing of some, this bears repeating over and over again. Well said.
There is no shortage of great art in the world. He receives my blind eye.
64bookaroo
Could fellow devotees expound on the merits of this Limited Edition?
This would help me make an informed decision!
This would help me make an informed decision!
65cronshaw
>62 ohrus: Me too, thank you >38 LolaWalser: for the illuminating, thoroughly off-putting further information. I hadn't appreciated the shocking extent of his abuse. I've never cared for Gill's art, and care less now. As art to me is always to some degree an expression of the artist's personality, I can't fully separate the two in my mind.
66inkcentricity
The website has been updated to say "At least 500 sets are available with matching numbers from the limitations of 750 and with an advantageous postage rate." which seems to confirm that the sets of three volumes are selling well (theoretically approaching 300 sold?)
Mine arrived this morning. I will get to unpack them tonight.
Mine arrived this morning. I will get to unpack them tonight.
67terebinth
>62 ohrus:
This is such an interesting place.
In my way I too am appreciative of Lola's post. As she approximately allows, though, every individual has themselves to answer to as regards their response to Gill's life and work, and for the life of me I cannot find any motive, or way, to connect my latent revulsion from the life and sympathy for its victims with my responses to Gill's art. Then, I'm as godless a cove as they come, sceptical of the "purity" of almost all religious impulse that comes to my attention: and given to expecting better creative work, on the whole, from someone enmeshed as Gill seems to have been in his own conscious response to life, even with its singularly hideous set of contortions and distortions, than from a more readily diagnosed hypocrisy or duplicity.
I can't think of any instance in which I give a damn about an artist's personality, unless the artist is a living one whom my slight patronage might help to continue with their work.
This is such an interesting place.
In my way I too am appreciative of Lola's post. As she approximately allows, though, every individual has themselves to answer to as regards their response to Gill's life and work, and for the life of me I cannot find any motive, or way, to connect my latent revulsion from the life and sympathy for its victims with my responses to Gill's art. Then, I'm as godless a cove as they come, sceptical of the "purity" of almost all religious impulse that comes to my attention: and given to expecting better creative work, on the whole, from someone enmeshed as Gill seems to have been in his own conscious response to life, even with its singularly hideous set of contortions and distortions, than from a more readily diagnosed hypocrisy or duplicity.
I can't think of any instance in which I give a damn about an artist's personality, unless the artist is a living one whom my slight patronage might help to continue with their work.
68LolaWalser
>62 ohrus:, >65 cronshaw: (and Sorion, if appropriate)
Thank you back for your kindness. I must stress that I have no intention of encouraging OR discouraging people from taking an interest in Gill, the dilemmas his life and art pose to us are to me personally at least partly unsolvable and there's no question that, like I said, the "solutions" really are a matter of personal conscience.
It's an extremely difficult topic (and very hard not to "drag out"! :)) so anything I say is bound to shortchange it, but, to try at least to hint at the complexity, consider for example whether everything he did is "contaminated" in the same way and degree. Does the knowledge of his crimes affect our view of, say, his lovely typefaces and every single illustration, be it of leaves and birds, in the same way as the idea of praying in a place worship surrounded by this man's would-be sacred art? I admit I see a difference--basically, the farther away from an expressly religious and moralising purpose, the more "bearable" it seems to me. But, of course, the next person will configure their own response etc.
I just think that we should face the ugliness that (sometimes and often) went and goes into what we call beautiful under any circumstances. When others have suffered for it as Gill's victims did then we have an ethical responsibility to do so. I suppose what is hard to convey is that this, at least as I interpret it, doesn't necessarily mean complete and absolute rejection (legitimate as this may be) but something like a state of double vision, in which we support multiple and conflicting insights.
Thank you back for your kindness. I must stress that I have no intention of encouraging OR discouraging people from taking an interest in Gill, the dilemmas his life and art pose to us are to me personally at least partly unsolvable and there's no question that, like I said, the "solutions" really are a matter of personal conscience.
It's an extremely difficult topic (and very hard not to "drag out"! :)) so anything I say is bound to shortchange it, but, to try at least to hint at the complexity, consider for example whether everything he did is "contaminated" in the same way and degree. Does the knowledge of his crimes affect our view of, say, his lovely typefaces and every single illustration, be it of leaves and birds, in the same way as the idea of praying in a place worship surrounded by this man's would-be sacred art? I admit I see a difference--basically, the farther away from an expressly religious and moralising purpose, the more "bearable" it seems to me. But, of course, the next person will configure their own response etc.
I just think that we should face the ugliness that (sometimes and often) went and goes into what we call beautiful under any circumstances. When others have suffered for it as Gill's victims did then we have an ethical responsibility to do so. I suppose what is hard to convey is that this, at least as I interpret it, doesn't necessarily mean complete and absolute rejection (legitimate as this may be) but something like a state of double vision, in which we support multiple and conflicting insights.
69JohnWilmot
I received these books earlier and was delighted by, and with, them. Some of the Society’s finest and most beautiful work here. Congratulations to all involved.
70HuxleyTheCat
>66 inkcentricity: "which seems to confirm that the sets of three volumes are selling well (theoretically approaching 300 sold?)" It could, or it could just be a marketing ploy.
71affle
>68 LolaWalser: and others
An interesting article here from earlier this year, in the context of an exhibition which I would like to have gone to, but didn't:
https://www.apollo-magazine.com/eric-gills-fall-from-grace/
It particularly highlights Lola's point about religious context.
I am an age to have been an admirer of Gill's lettering and typographic talents especially, since long before Fiona MacCarthy's 1989 revelatory biography, so I've settled for the 'double vision', as it's not obvious how later knowledge of the artist's behaviour ought to change the prior appreciation of the work. I've been reading Thomas Dilworth's biography of David Jones, who lived for a time in Gill's circle at Ditchling and was for a long time engaged to Gill's daughter Petra. Dilworth claims Jones was unaware of the incestuous behaviour, and even claims Gill's giving up the incest (in 1921) was an impressive moral achievement; this strikes me as a more serious defect of vision on both counts.
An interesting article here from earlier this year, in the context of an exhibition which I would like to have gone to, but didn't:
https://www.apollo-magazine.com/eric-gills-fall-from-grace/
It particularly highlights Lola's point about religious context.
I am an age to have been an admirer of Gill's lettering and typographic talents especially, since long before Fiona MacCarthy's 1989 revelatory biography, so I've settled for the 'double vision', as it's not obvious how later knowledge of the artist's behaviour ought to change the prior appreciation of the work. I've been reading Thomas Dilworth's biography of David Jones, who lived for a time in Gill's circle at Ditchling and was for a long time engaged to Gill's daughter Petra. Dilworth claims Jones was unaware of the incestuous behaviour, and even claims Gill's giving up the incest (in 1921) was an impressive moral achievement; this strikes me as a more serious defect of vision on both counts.
72parchmenths
>71 affle: "Gill's giving up the incest..."
and naming his typeface Gill SANS....
which would be a suitable font for Michael Pollan's The Omnivores Dilemma.
and naming his typeface Gill SANS....
which would be a suitable font for Michael Pollan's The Omnivores Dilemma.
73PeterFitzGerald
>58 affle: "... there are more of this kind of thing to come."
I do hope you're right. I also hope that they allow those who have opted for the matching limitation number sets to reserve the same numbers for the rest of the series.
I do hope you're right. I also hope that they allow those who have opted for the matching limitation number sets to reserve the same numbers for the rest of the series.
74inkcentricity
>70 HuxleyTheCat: Not a marketing ploy. They got their estimates wrong. It's not good marketing to have one number on the brochure and another on the website.... I'm pleased because I thought the sales for the set would be strong - it's nice to be right occasionally (and about something positive).
PS. I'm not the mole just one of the dis-membered.
PS. I'm not the mole just one of the dis-membered.
75Cat_of_Ulthar
I see where you're going but past experience does make me wonder, though: the 'first' 300 - is that the first 300 as in numbers 1 - 300, or just the first 300 random ones they pull out of the warehouse? (Duly increased to the first 500 random ones.) Discussion of previous LEs inclines me towards the latter but, personally, I'm not that bothered about which specific number I get.
Unless, maybe, it was number '1'.
That would be nice. :-)
(In the interests of enlightenment: If you ordered the set of three, did it come in a specially designed 'set-of-three- cardboard package? Or was it three individual cardboard packages bundled together?)
Unless, maybe, it was number '1'.
That would be nice. :-)
(In the interests of enlightenment: If you ordered the set of three, did it come in a specially designed 'set-of-three- cardboard package? Or was it three individual cardboard packages bundled together?)
76HuxleyTheCat
>74 inkcentricity: You clearly have more faith than I do. The mismatch of numbers between brochure and website will have a negligible effect, while the "advantageous postage rate" on the other hand is likely to draw attention. And note that it wasn't changed until 'after' >51 davidjbrown10: 's comment about the postage effectively being a discount.
77Cat_of_Ulthar
>76 HuxleyTheCat:
I'm no marketing bod but - you save about ten quid by spending an extra 100 quid? Are we really that shallow?
Yes, okay, we probably are ... fsssst!
I'm no marketing bod but - you save about ten quid by spending an extra 100 quid? Are we really that shallow?
Yes, okay, we probably are ... fsssst!
78bookfair_e
>75 Cat_of_Ulthar: If you ordered the set of three, did it come in a specially designed 'set-of-three- cardboard package?
Yes it did. I got the set of matching numbers (in the mid-forties); the packaging is designed for the set and is labelled Fine Press Classics – Set of Three – No. x x
Yes it did. I got the set of matching numbers (in the mid-forties); the packaging is designed for the set and is labelled Fine Press Classics – Set of Three – No. x x
79HuxleyTheCat
>77 Cat_of_Ulthar: Yeah, but you are getting another book too :-) Let's face it, this forum lights up like a Christmas tree every time someone mentions 'sale' or 'voucher' or 'discount'.
80Cat_of_Ulthar
>79 HuxleyTheCat:
Fair point.
And we do love a bargain, don't we? I'd been dithering over the Hitchhiker set for ages but now I can put my well-thumbed paperbacks aside ... )
Fair point.
And we do love a bargain, don't we? I'd been dithering over the Hitchhiker set for ages but now I can put my well-thumbed paperbacks aside ... )
81LolaWalser
>71 affle:
Thanks for that, very interesting article (and magazine, it seems). So many questions can be raised that it seems futile to pursue any.
(ETA, from the article:) The problem of how to rescue the artworks from that knowledge will not go away easily.
Can't disagree, obviously, but I'd say it's best to forget the idea that they can be "rescued" for all. For my part, I see the greatest difficulties (ranging from painful-to-contemplate to impossible-to-contemplate) when confronting his religious and erotic art. In the context of what he did, at least for those who can't ignore it, the former reeks of hypocrisy and the latter seems monstrous. (Sorry, Song of Songs!)
My one quibble (not with the writer per se, it arises from the debate naturally) is with the notion that because he was a gifted artist and because he cloaked himself in the garb of a religious seeker, there might be some deeper philosophical dilemma to discern behind all this. That if we mumble long enough about sinning, falling, experimenting, religious questing etc. we might see it yet as a legitimate endeavour. As what you say about Jones implies, it's a self-serving perspective that ignores the victim in favour of the "more special" transgressor.
If Gill had been an ordinary man who slept with his sisters and children (to say nothing of the dog!), no one would need more than two seconds to make up their mind about him.
Thanks for that, very interesting article (and magazine, it seems). So many questions can be raised that it seems futile to pursue any.
(ETA, from the article:) The problem of how to rescue the artworks from that knowledge will not go away easily.
Can't disagree, obviously, but I'd say it's best to forget the idea that they can be "rescued" for all. For my part, I see the greatest difficulties (ranging from painful-to-contemplate to impossible-to-contemplate) when confronting his religious and erotic art. In the context of what he did, at least for those who can't ignore it, the former reeks of hypocrisy and the latter seems monstrous. (Sorry, Song of Songs!)
My one quibble (not with the writer per se, it arises from the debate naturally) is with the notion that because he was a gifted artist and because he cloaked himself in the garb of a religious seeker, there might be some deeper philosophical dilemma to discern behind all this. That if we mumble long enough about sinning, falling, experimenting, religious questing etc. we might see it yet as a legitimate endeavour. As what you say about Jones implies, it's a self-serving perspective that ignores the victim in favour of the "more special" transgressor.
If Gill had been an ordinary man who slept with his sisters and children (to say nothing of the dog!), no one would need more than two seconds to make up their mind about him.
82terebinth
>81 LolaWalser:
What's an ordinary man? If I knew nothing about someone other than that he had slept with his daughters, sisters and dog, through his own devising, I would only need two seconds to acknowledge the damage he might have done the lives of some or all of them, but the further conclusions I might defensibly draw about him wouldn't be extensive. If I learned that he was a stonemason who had worked on Durham cathedral, I can't say I would consider the cathedral thereby tainted in some way unless and until his work could be identified, removed and replaced by that of men thought to be living less blameably.
Those duped or victimised by Gill are dead: destroying, suppressing or ignoring his art can't do anything for them, If anyone feels the art to be irredeemably unclean because of how the man lived, then, yes, they probably do well to avoid it. I can't but guess that such a linking of his life and the work that remains from it is somehow superstitious at root, a fear of a supposed corrupting power or influence that the work does not in fact have. Or a declining to digest and to live with the reality of the case, that a mind in abject or spectacular moral disorder may yet produce thought and direct creative production some of which may be found more than worthy of our time. If anyone finds his art to be simply dull and unmoving, that, as always, is an eminently reasonable cause to leave it well alone.
I've nothing to say in mitigation of Gill's crimes. Likewise, if a hard-working farmer were to be convicted of rape, his well-run farm would count not at all in mitigation of the offence: but only superstition would respond by burning all its produce in a hungry land.
What's an ordinary man? If I knew nothing about someone other than that he had slept with his daughters, sisters and dog, through his own devising, I would only need two seconds to acknowledge the damage he might have done the lives of some or all of them, but the further conclusions I might defensibly draw about him wouldn't be extensive. If I learned that he was a stonemason who had worked on Durham cathedral, I can't say I would consider the cathedral thereby tainted in some way unless and until his work could be identified, removed and replaced by that of men thought to be living less blameably.
Those duped or victimised by Gill are dead: destroying, suppressing or ignoring his art can't do anything for them, If anyone feels the art to be irredeemably unclean because of how the man lived, then, yes, they probably do well to avoid it. I can't but guess that such a linking of his life and the work that remains from it is somehow superstitious at root, a fear of a supposed corrupting power or influence that the work does not in fact have. Or a declining to digest and to live with the reality of the case, that a mind in abject or spectacular moral disorder may yet produce thought and direct creative production some of which may be found more than worthy of our time. If anyone finds his art to be simply dull and unmoving, that, as always, is an eminently reasonable cause to leave it well alone.
I've nothing to say in mitigation of Gill's crimes. Likewise, if a hard-working farmer were to be convicted of rape, his well-run farm would count not at all in mitigation of the offence: but only superstition would respond by burning all its produce in a hungry land.
83LolaWalser
>82 terebinth:
I meant that an ordinary man wouldn't be protected by claims to deeper significance of his crimes.
only superstition would respond by burning all its produce in a hungry land.
Not an issue with Gill, though, and a red herring within this discussion. Bon appétit.
Sorry, I missed this:
I can't but guess that such a linking of his life and the work that remains from it is somehow superstitious at root, a fear of a supposed corrupting power or influence that the work does not in fact have.
Then I guess you haven't read Gill (and I'm not sure how you made sense of anything that was said on the topic here), because HE is the one who did the linking. That's the whole point, in a way...
I meant that an ordinary man wouldn't be protected by claims to deeper significance of his crimes.
only superstition would respond by burning all its produce in a hungry land.
Not an issue with Gill, though, and a red herring within this discussion. Bon appétit.
Sorry, I missed this:
I can't but guess that such a linking of his life and the work that remains from it is somehow superstitious at root, a fear of a supposed corrupting power or influence that the work does not in fact have.
Then I guess you haven't read Gill (and I'm not sure how you made sense of anything that was said on the topic here), because HE is the one who did the linking. That's the whole point, in a way...
84terebinth
>83 LolaWalser:
I've read a certain amount of him, the autobiography decades ago, and more recently parts of Beauty Looks After Herself. I'm well aware of the reality of that linkage to him, in his own self-justification and what passed for an understanding, but I'm not in the business of becoming his disciple in any way, shape or form, so his belief in such a linkage doesn't grant it any reality or consequence to me. Any more than if my hypothetical stonemason had attributed the quality of his well-cut blocks or his gargoyles to his indulgence in abuse.
I've read a certain amount of him, the autobiography decades ago, and more recently parts of Beauty Looks After Herself. I'm well aware of the reality of that linkage to him, in his own self-justification and what passed for an understanding, but I'm not in the business of becoming his disciple in any way, shape or form, so his belief in such a linkage doesn't grant it any reality or consequence to me. Any more than if my hypothetical stonemason had attributed the quality of his well-cut blocks or his gargoyles to his indulgence in abuse.
85LolaWalser
>84 terebinth:
his belief in such a linkage doesn't grant it any reality or consequence to me.
Cool. I bet the academics are feigning there's anything more to consider there simply to keep their sinecures, the bastards. :)
his belief in such a linkage doesn't grant it any reality or consequence to me.
Cool. I bet the academics are feigning there's anything more to consider there simply to keep their sinecures, the bastards. :)
86LesMiserables
>68 LolaWalser: I must stress that I have no intention of encouraging OR discouraging people from taking an interest in Gill, the dilemmas his life and art pose to us are to me personally at least partly unsolvable and there's no question that, like I said, the "solutions" really are a matter of personal conscience.
Then...
>28 LolaWalser: This is very sad, Folio, some of your customers are VERY concerned about public figures' "distasteful ethics". The mind boggles at the thought of what effect the ethics of a serial philanderer/incestuous brother/incestuous father/sexual abuser of children and at least one dog* would have on such delicate righteous souls.
You are entitled like the next man to his opinion, but contradicting yourself, well...
Then...
>28 LolaWalser: This is very sad, Folio, some of your customers are VERY concerned about public figures' "distasteful ethics". The mind boggles at the thought of what effect the ethics of a serial philanderer/incestuous brother/incestuous father/sexual abuser of children and at least one dog* would have on such delicate righteous souls.
You are entitled like the next man to his opinion, but contradicting yourself, well...
87terebinth
>85 LolaWalser:
Now, now. I don't begrudge anyone their modest sinecure ;) And, even beyond such bounty, I'm sure there's plenty of honest academic graft to be done by way of improving, or at any rate tugging in one direction or another, our collective understanding of Eric Gill the man. Whether there's much of importance for relatively ordinary mortals to learn from such an understanding, beyond that beautiful and resonant art doesn't necessarily proceed from beautiful; orderly or even anyhow defensible lives, I don't know: and there's no shortage of exemplars to teach us that.
Now, now. I don't begrudge anyone their modest sinecure ;) And, even beyond such bounty, I'm sure there's plenty of honest academic graft to be done by way of improving, or at any rate tugging in one direction or another, our collective understanding of Eric Gill the man. Whether there's much of importance for relatively ordinary mortals to learn from such an understanding, beyond that beautiful and resonant art doesn't necessarily proceed from beautiful; orderly or even anyhow defensible lives, I don't know: and there's no shortage of exemplars to teach us that.
88LolaWalser
>87 terebinth:
I don't know what I'm missing, but I believe we've covered all that before, and more than once. If you think you're raising some new opposition to me, perhaps you could save yourself some effort if you took another look at my posts. Just saying--I'd rather not be led into circles having to endlessly repeat myself. Who would! ;)
I don't know what I'm missing, but I believe we've covered all that before, and more than once. If you think you're raising some new opposition to me, perhaps you could save yourself some effort if you took another look at my posts. Just saying--I'd rather not be led into circles having to endlessly repeat myself. Who would! ;)
91gmacaree
>90 folio_books: now I'm selfishly hoping we can keep our numbers for the entire series, if series there is ;)
92susanne-27
So it is confirmed it will be a series then? No Song of Songs for me then, I can't afford another series...
93gmacaree
>92 susanne-27: As affle mentions above, the essays accompanying the works state "The first three facsimiles issued by the Folio Society in the Fine Press Classics series are all Old Testament texts,..." which would be strongly indicative of a series
94Sorion
>89 gmacaree: #4 that's great!
95folio_books
>91 gmacaree: I'm selfishly hoping we can keep our numbers for the entire series, if series there is
I'm hoping the indications are right and this is the start of a series. If so, WHAT a series! Though I do worry that looking at my shelves people might conclude I'm religious :) (Note to self: move the Dawkins set into more prominent position).
I'm hoping the indications are right and this is the start of a series. If so, WHAT a series! Though I do worry that looking at my shelves people might conclude I'm religious :) (Note to self: move the Dawkins set into more prominent position).
96LesMiserables
>95 folio_books:
Ha! I smiled when I read this. Our understanding of such matters rarely suffer from inertia. My FS RD books are just waiting to be traded away for something else! :-)
Ha! I smiled when I read this. Our understanding of such matters rarely suffer from inertia. My FS RD books are just waiting to be traded away for something else! :-)
97Cat_of_Ulthar
>95 folio_books:
Not in the least religious myself, either, but the cultural and literary importance of the bible is undeniable, and it is a fascinating, if often contradictory, read. Like you, I hope there is more to come.
Perhaps they could pick up a few more Dawkins books as a contrast ;)
Not in the least religious myself, either, but the cultural and literary importance of the bible is undeniable, and it is a fascinating, if often contradictory, read. Like you, I hope there is more to come.
Perhaps they could pick up a few more Dawkins books as a contrast ;)
98folio_books
>97 Cat_of_Ulthar: the cultural and literary importance of the bible is undeniable, and it is a fascinating, if often contradictory, read.
Oh, it doesn't really put me off. If people want to feel sorry for me because I'm religious I'll let them ;) I'm quite happy to accept their literary significance and Folio are good at promoting that aspect ("The Bible Designed to be Read as Literature"). In fact I have a shelf full of what I consider religious and related works, though it's not really on public view. Now I'm thinking of moving my shelf of fairy stories to keep it company.
I wouldn't object to more Dawkins but imo there's none of his good stuff left for Folio. I thought "The God Delusion" petty and mean, not worthy of him. There's an old saying he should have taken more note of: "They're more to be pitied than scolded." In my opinion, of course :)
I'll be delighted if this new series continues. 1920's engravings - what's not to like?
Edited for afterthought.
Oh, it doesn't really put me off. If people want to feel sorry for me because I'm religious I'll let them ;) I'm quite happy to accept their literary significance and Folio are good at promoting that aspect ("The Bible Designed to be Read as Literature"). In fact I have a shelf full of what I consider religious and related works, though it's not really on public view. Now I'm thinking of moving my shelf of fairy stories to keep it company.
I wouldn't object to more Dawkins but imo there's none of his good stuff left for Folio. I thought "The God Delusion" petty and mean, not worthy of him. There's an old saying he should have taken more note of: "They're more to be pitied than scolded." In my opinion, of course :)
I'll be delighted if this new series continues. 1920's engravings - what's not to like?
Edited for afterthought.
99Cat_of_Ulthar
>98 folio_books:
My bad, I misunderstood your post. I don't feel sorry for people who have religion, on the whole. Reality-denying creationists, on the other hand, I feel very sorry for because they misunderstand both science and religion. They insist on squashing God into their own little box.
No less an authority (I jest, obviously, but I think he has a point) than Ian Anderson says on the sleeve of Aqualung: 'And Man gave unto God a multitude of names, that he might be Lord over all the earth when it was suited to Man'. I think that's pretty much the creationist attitude. They want God to be what they believe. What God Himself believes is irrelevant.
And you might be right that Folio have already published the best of Dawkins, I haven't read all his works. (I have read the God Delusion and, while I liked a lot of it, I agree that some of the arguments were weak.)
Sometimes their publishing strategy is puzzling - releasing From Russia before Moonraker?
Back to Ian: 'He's not the kind of God you have to wind up on Sunday.'
My bad, I misunderstood your post. I don't feel sorry for people who have religion, on the whole. Reality-denying creationists, on the other hand, I feel very sorry for because they misunderstand both science and religion. They insist on squashing God into their own little box.
No less an authority (I jest, obviously, but I think he has a point) than Ian Anderson says on the sleeve of Aqualung: 'And Man gave unto God a multitude of names, that he might be Lord over all the earth when it was suited to Man'. I think that's pretty much the creationist attitude. They want God to be what they believe. What God Himself believes is irrelevant.
And you might be right that Folio have already published the best of Dawkins, I haven't read all his works. (I have read the God Delusion and, while I liked a lot of it, I agree that some of the arguments were weak.)
Sometimes their publishing strategy is puzzling - releasing From Russia before Moonraker?
Back to Ian: 'He's not the kind of God you have to wind up on Sunday.'
100susanne-27
>98 folio_books: I like the older, more cranky, Dawkins. In particular, I always find it fascinating when someone gets attacked by people who are, or at least were believed to be, on their side. Seeing the reaction reveals a lot about their character.
I think " Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief" is worthy of the Folio treatment, and should sell well.
I think " Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief" is worthy of the Folio treatment, and should sell well.
101folio_books
>99 Cat_of_Ulthar: My bad, I misunderstood your post.
Not at all, and I did appreciate your additional angle. I've come to believe my problem with religion is the indoctrination aspect - one generation indoctrinates the next and so it goes on. I detest the idea of moulding the thoughts of children in unnatural ways. But enough. Believe it or not I usually try very hard to avoid bringing religion - and politics - into FSD posts. There's enough controversy as it is (printing books in China shock horror) without making it exponentially worse.
>100 susanne-27: I think " Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief" is worthy of the Folio treatment, and should sell well.
I'll be honest and say I'd never heard of this until you mentioned it. I did a five-minute in-depth research programme (Amazon) and left wondering why I hadn't encountered it before, having been quite deeply into Jung and Dostoyevsky in my mid 20's-30's. Looks a heavy book, in every sense, maybe beyond my attention span now. But yes, I'd welcome a Folio edition. Thanks for pointing this out.
Edited for afterthought.
Not at all, and I did appreciate your additional angle. I've come to believe my problem with religion is the indoctrination aspect - one generation indoctrinates the next and so it goes on. I detest the idea of moulding the thoughts of children in unnatural ways. But enough. Believe it or not I usually try very hard to avoid bringing religion - and politics - into FSD posts. There's enough controversy as it is (printing books in China shock horror) without making it exponentially worse.
>100 susanne-27: I think " Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief" is worthy of the Folio treatment, and should sell well.
I'll be honest and say I'd never heard of this until you mentioned it. I did a five-minute in-depth research programme (Amazon) and left wondering why I hadn't encountered it before, having been quite deeply into Jung and Dostoyevsky in my mid 20's-30's. Looks a heavy book, in every sense, maybe beyond my attention span now. But yes, I'd welcome a Folio edition. Thanks for pointing this out.
Edited for afterthought.
102susanne-27
>101 folio_books: The author was relatively unknown until last year, so there is not really a reason why anyone should have heard of him before then. Note that almost all reviews were made recently. I have not finished the book, but the author has a youtube channel that you might like.
He is quite famous now, and I'm sure many people would buy a FS edition of his book. Also, since he recommends many books that have already received the FS treatment it would be possible that this might benefit cross-sales as well (Hemingway, Golding, Dostoevesky, Tolstoy, Harper Lee, Huxley, Orwell, etc.)
He is quite famous now, and I'm sure many people would buy a FS edition of his book. Also, since he recommends many books that have already received the FS treatment it would be possible that this might benefit cross-sales as well (Hemingway, Golding, Dostoevesky, Tolstoy, Harper Lee, Huxley, Orwell, etc.)
103folio_books
>102 susanne-27: The author was relatively unknown until last year
All is explained. Thanks again.
>102 susanne-27: he recommends many books that have already received the FS treatment
I can believe that. The connections in that world are many. Jung, for example, led me to one of my favourite authors, Herman Hesse, which prompts me to ask: hey, Folio, I'm still waiting for you to publish some Hesse, which you promised me circa 1978.
All is explained. Thanks again.
>102 susanne-27: he recommends many books that have already received the FS treatment
I can believe that. The connections in that world are many. Jung, for example, led me to one of my favourite authors, Herman Hesse, which prompts me to ask: hey, Folio, I'm still waiting for you to publish some Hesse, which you promised me circa 1978.
104susanne-27
>103 folio_books: Jordan Peterson is the reason why I'm interested in the bible. Otherwise I would not be interested in these facsimile editions as well. Down the rabbit hole...
105c_schelle
I just received my set with a nice low number and I really like them. Then I saw some lose threads from the binding in Genesis. Here is a picture:
https://pics.librarything.com/picsizes/6d/54/6d54eb0ef1983da6370724b7041434b4171...
This is not normal, isn't it? Has anybody else received his books and can confirm this?
https://pics.librarything.com/picsizes/6d/54/6d54eb0ef1983da6370724b7041434b4171...
This is not normal, isn't it? Has anybody else received his books and can confirm this?
106gmacaree
>105 c_schelle: It looks to me like none of the bottom margin threads are actually sewn back in on my version of Genesis, but in my case they all tucked themselves into the gutter and were difficult to extract.
I don't know enough about the early 20th-century books to know if this was deliberate or not. In my case I wouldn't have noticed if not for your photo
I don't know enough about the early 20th-century books to know if this was deliberate or not. In my case I wouldn't have noticed if not for your photo
107HuxleyTheCat
>105 c_schelle: It's just a free end to the binding thread and I wouldn't consider it to be a fault.
108c_schelle
>106 gmacaree: So it's the same in your copy? When I open the book wide on the pages with the threads they pop out.
>105 c_schelle: I have not seen this happen on any of my other FS books. Therefore I'm a bit astounded.
>105 c_schelle: I have not seen this happen on any of my other FS books. Therefore I'm a bit astounded.
109HuxleyTheCat
>108 c_schelle: Usually the free ends of the thread will be tied off and will remain on the outer side of the signature, but occasionally the tie will come undone, or it is cut in the wrong place, and the free end appears on the inside of the signature. As long as it is just a free end and the remaining threads are tight then there is no problem: however, your description that "When I open the book wide on the pages with the threads they pop out" is rather different from just one free end, as indicated in your photograph, and indicative of something problematic.
110c_schelle
>109 HuxleyTheCat: The first two pages where the binding thread can be seen is fixed (https://pics.librarything.com/picsizes/bc/07/bc0785210ab61f663742f4c7041434b41716b42.jpg). On all other pages it is lose like in the photo in >105 c_schelle:. It seems that they just cut off the knots, like you speculated. They all seem to tight and don't get loose.
111UK_History_Fan
What is that brown box material made of? Looks like either paper or a bad faux leather.
112c_schelle
>111 UK_History_Fan: It is indeed paper. Here is the excerpt from the website: 'The solander presentation box is covered in smooth rust brown Surbalin paper and lined with Zanders Efalin wove in dark brown.'
113gmacaree
>111 UK_History_Fan: It's paper, and I'm actually quite taken with the feel.
114gmacaree
>108 c_schelle: I had to try quite hard to get mine to come out, no popping here.
115HuxleyTheCat
>110 c_schelle: The key thing is, are the signatures and threads tight?
116c_schelle
>115 HuxleyTheCat: The threads are tight. By the signatures being tight do you mean that the pages don't come apart? (I have never heard 'signature' in an other context than a person's signature and had to look it up). If so, the pages are all in place and don't come loose.
117HuxleyTheCat
>116 c_schelle: If the threads are tight and are holding the pages without any unexpected movement, then I would say that the book is ok. If you take a look at some youtube videos on bookbinding, you will see how the signatures are sewn together and it may help you to understand what is going wrong and to diagnose if you have a real problem with the book or not.
118c_schelle
>117 HuxleyTheCat: Thanks for the information. I will look up some videos tomorrow.
119folio_books
>118 c_schelle: I will look up some videos tomorrow.
And I might join you. I am ridiculously ignorant on the subject of bookbinding. Thanks Huxley.
And I might join you. I am ridiculously ignorant on the subject of bookbinding. Thanks Huxley.
120MobyRichard
>116 c_schelle:
Signature. It's one of those words so often misused that it's become "synonymous" with words (gathering or section) that might actually
give you an idea of what your bookbinder is talking about. Apologists might refer to this as synecdoche.
"In bookbinding, section (sometimes gathering) refers to a group of bifolios, or sheets of paper, stacked together and folded in half. The term is sometimes used interchangeably with signature, though the latter technically refers only to the signature mark at the bottom of the first page of a printed section."
Signature. It's one of those words so often misused that it's become "synonymous" with words (gathering or section) that might actually
give you an idea of what your bookbinder is talking about. Apologists might refer to this as synecdoche.
"In bookbinding, section (sometimes gathering) refers to a group of bifolios, or sheets of paper, stacked together and folded in half. The term is sometimes used interchangeably with signature, though the latter technically refers only to the signature mark at the bottom of the first page of a printed section."
121HuxleyTheCat
>120 MobyRichard: signature
1. A section or GATHERING (2) of a book, either in the flat or folded state, to which a SIGNATURE MARK has been assigned. Technically, the sets of 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 printed pages. when folded, constitute a "section," while a "signature" is only the sequential mark of identification printed on the initial page of the section; today, however, little if any distinction is made between the two expressions. The term is not altogether synonymous with SHEET (5) , because a sheet as printed may contain more than one section (see: FOLDING ), and, in the case of a half sheet, may constitute a section of fewer pages than others in the same publication. Thus books consist of many sections but those sections may not consist of the same number of leaves. 2. The name or initials, written in a person's own hand, for the purpose of authenticating a document. (69 , 140 , 189 , 287 )
Title Bookbinding and the conservation of books: a dictionary of descriptive terminology
National Preservation Program publication
Authors Matt Roberts, Don Etherington
Publisher Library of Congress, 1982
Original from the University of Michigan
Just in case you missed it "today, however, little if any distinction is made between the two expressions." This from 1982, so I think a bookbinder working in 2017 would certainly know what someone was talking about, unless, of course, they've been getting their education from wikipedia.
1. A section or GATHERING (2) of a book, either in the flat or folded state, to which a SIGNATURE MARK has been assigned. Technically, the sets of 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 printed pages. when folded, constitute a "section," while a "signature" is only the sequential mark of identification printed on the initial page of the section; today, however, little if any distinction is made between the two expressions. The term is not altogether synonymous with SHEET (5) , because a sheet as printed may contain more than one section (see: FOLDING ), and, in the case of a half sheet, may constitute a section of fewer pages than others in the same publication. Thus books consist of many sections but those sections may not consist of the same number of leaves. 2. The name or initials, written in a person's own hand, for the purpose of authenticating a document. (69 , 140 , 189 , 287 )
Title Bookbinding and the conservation of books: a dictionary of descriptive terminology
National Preservation Program publication
Authors Matt Roberts, Don Etherington
Publisher Library of Congress, 1982
Original from the University of Michigan
Just in case you missed it "today, however, little if any distinction is made between the two expressions." This from 1982, so I think a bookbinder working in 2017 would certainly know what someone was talking about, unless, of course, they've been getting their education from wikipedia.
122HuxleyTheCat
I was flicking through the latest catalogue from Postscript this evening and I came across a book which may make a nice little stocking-filler for those who appreciate the art of David Jones, Gertrude Hermes, E. McKnight Kauffer etc: https://www.psbooks.co.uk/The-Ariel-Poems-9780571316434
123MobyRichard
>121 HuxleyTheCat:
Yeah, but I didn't say anything about bookbinders understanding or misunderstanding the term. I'm talking about Joe Prole.
Computer programmers know what JSON stands for. I don't see how it's relevant to state that professionals
understand their own jargon.
Yeah, but I didn't say anything about bookbinders understanding or misunderstanding the term. I'm talking about Joe Prole.
Computer programmers know what JSON stands for. I don't see how it's relevant to state that professionals
understand their own jargon.
124kdweber
Quick delivery and as is usual for their LEs great packaging. Paper solander boxes and the books are, of course, very thin but very nicely printed.
125ultrarightist
>124 kdweber: Good to hear. How is the quality of the paper compared to, say, the Letterpress Shakespeare?
126kdweber
>125 ultrarightist: They use a nice laid paper but nowhere near the quality of the letterpress Shakespeare which uses Zerkall mould-made paper.
127ultrarightist
I ordered the set. I also recently procured the Gill illustrated LEC edition of Hamlet - lovely! I'm proud to own it. Additionally, I purchased some Gill books related to his fine press work. Very nice. i shall treasure them. A toast to Gill's fine press work! This may cause some gastro-intestinal distress to one of our number, but I care not a fig.
128LesMiserables
>127 ultrarightist:
Good work. A brilliant artist altogether. I haven't ordered Song of Songs as I am on the look out for the FS Four Gospels instead.
Good work. A brilliant artist altogether. I haven't ordered Song of Songs as I am on the look out for the FS Four Gospels instead.
129terebinth
>128 LesMiserables:
I hope it soon comes your way: it's a glorious work. I was an early purchaser, and am surprised that one of Folio's largest limitations sold out in a reasonably short period and that copies are more than holding their value to this day.
The old Remington typewriter slogan, "To Save Time is to Lengthen Life", kicked in for me after four or five days of failing to dismiss thoughts of buying the present three volumes, and they're to be delivered tomorrow. The recent direction of Folio Society publishing, and to some extent its pricing, have left me shrugging with indifference at this year's new collections in general, but these books are in a category at which the FS excels. Aside from Mani/Roumeli, all my orders for 2017 have been for LEs on the one hand and heavily discounted sale books on the other.
I hope it soon comes your way: it's a glorious work. I was an early purchaser, and am surprised that one of Folio's largest limitations sold out in a reasonably short period and that copies are more than holding their value to this day.
The old Remington typewriter slogan, "To Save Time is to Lengthen Life", kicked in for me after four or five days of failing to dismiss thoughts of buying the present three volumes, and they're to be delivered tomorrow. The recent direction of Folio Society publishing, and to some extent its pricing, have left me shrugging with indifference at this year's new collections in general, but these books are in a category at which the FS excels. Aside from Mani/Roumeli, all my orders for 2017 have been for LEs on the one hand and heavily discounted sale books on the other.
130edgeworn
I have just received my set (#249) of these Fine Press facsimiles and I am delighted with them. I was familiar with the Gill illustrations to The Song of Songs, but The Book of Jonah with David Jones' lively illustrations is less familiar and a real treat. The major discovery for me of the three however is the stunning sequence of wood engravings by Paul Nash for Genesis. I had thought that the Neuland type face would be distracting, but in fact it works superbly with the strength of the semi-abstract Nash illustrations. (I'm less keen on the French folds of the paper, with each page folded double at the head, as this gives rather a stiff effect as the pages are turned. Its a facsimile, however, and this paper folding was in the original so it must be accepted.)
A very successful start to what I hope will become a splendid series. Well done Folio Society!
A very successful start to what I hope will become a splendid series. Well done Folio Society!
131davidjbrown10
I completely agree with >130 edgeworn: about this set – the three works are fascinatingly inventive and varied in their use of typography and illustration, and a wonderful eye-opener for those of us who don't know a whole lot about the inter-war private press movement. I too look forward to more in the series. However, though the facsimiles are produced with great skill and care, the individual solander tombs are overly massive for such slender volumes. The three could easily have been accommodated in a single box not a lot thicker than any one of these, with dividers to protect the facsimile dust-wrappers from each other. Perhaps the FS could do this with any future collections of two or more books in the Fine Press Classics series, given the obvious success of this as a set (rapidly upped from 300 to 500 out of the total 750 limitation).
132LesMiserables
So, having got my hands on Gill's Four Gospels LE, I have now just ordered the Fine Press Classics: Genesis, The Book of Jonah and The Song of Songs.
Glad to eventually get these.
Glad to eventually get these.
133LesMiserables
Well my LE of this set of three arrived, with matching limitation numbers, and I am absolutely delighted. The quality is outstanding in my opinion and the presentation is sensational. Each is unique in its own way, with the illustrations by David Jones, initially being a standout feature. Each is housed in its own solander box and includes a commentary as a separe pamphlet.
If you are interested in these volumes, do not delay, once they are gone, I expect these to be not the easiest to get as a troika.
If you are interested in these volumes, do not delay, once they are gone, I expect these to be not the easiest to get as a troika.
134dlphcoracl
>133 LesMiserables:
IMHO, the gem in this trio is the facsimile of Genesis. Amongst high-end private press book collectors this is widely recognized as one of the most innovative book designs of the 20th century, especially notable for the abstract illustrations (12 woodcuts) by Paul Nash. The choice of the bold, cold Rudolf Koch Neuland type fits seamlessly with these illustrations. Toss in superb letterpress printing by the Curwen Press on a fine German Zanders handmade paper and you have a flawless little book.
IMHO, the gem in this trio is the facsimile of Genesis. Amongst high-end private press book collectors this is widely recognized as one of the most innovative book designs of the 20th century, especially notable for the abstract illustrations (12 woodcuts) by Paul Nash. The choice of the bold, cold Rudolf Koch Neuland type fits seamlessly with these illustrations. Toss in superb letterpress printing by the Curwen Press on a fine German Zanders handmade paper and you have a flawless little book.
136mnmcdwl
I received an email this morning noting that the set of all three of these had less than 15 copies. They’ve been on my to buy list since their release, so I quickly logged in to check and there were 3 left (now 0). I’m glad I could pick it up before it disappeared, though I wish I had done so during a sale or with a coupon code. It seems that there are still individual copies of Genesis and Jonah available though.
137ubiquitousuk
I just bought the last copy of Book of Jonah, which was also the last of the series to remain available. I had been watching it for some time with the counter sat on 11. Earlier this week it dropped to 10, and then overnight went down to 1. So I suspect someone might have bought 9 of the last 10 copies to resell; I'll be curious to see if a new stockist shows up on the market.
In any case, thank you Mr anonymous reseller for being considerate enough to leave one copy for me and save me paying your inflated price.
In any case, thank you Mr anonymous reseller for being considerate enough to leave one copy for me and save me paying your inflated price.
138punkzip
>137 ubiquitousuk: I'd be surprised if Jonah can sell for a premium unless it is part of the entire Fine Press Classics trilogy.
139terebinth
>138 punkzip:
Not the sort of mark-up we've seen on some recent Folio volumes, but booksellers' hopes seem pretty firm - six copies currently on ABE of which five are in the UK, for prices starting at £200 and rising to £326 from our old friends Island Books.
Not the sort of mark-up we've seen on some recent Folio volumes, but booksellers' hopes seem pretty firm - six copies currently on ABE of which five are in the UK, for prices starting at £200 and rising to £326 from our old friends Island Books.
140What_What
>137 ubiquitousuk: Could it be there were 9 other people like yourself that were waffling over buying it, and when it was down to the last few copies they also took the plunge?
141dlphcoracl
>138 punkzip:
>139 terebinth:
>140 What_What:
The gem in that Fine Press Classic trilogy was the edition of Genesis, with Paul Nash's famous modernist illustrations. This is one of the most sought after of the 20th century fine & private press books and the FS facsimile was superb. Folio Society Devotees who did not pull the trigger on that one should don sackcloth and ashes.
>139 terebinth:
>140 What_What:
The gem in that Fine Press Classic trilogy was the edition of Genesis, with Paul Nash's famous modernist illustrations. This is one of the most sought after of the 20th century fine & private press books and the FS facsimile was superb. Folio Society Devotees who did not pull the trigger on that one should don sackcloth and ashes.
143ubiquitousuk
>140 What_What: yes it could be. But in that case I find it striking that nobody bought for about three weeks while the counter was on 11, but as soon is it hot 10 nine people bought within about 24 hours.
>141 dlphcoracl: yes, Nash's avant garde engravings look great, but I just don't think I could live with that grotesque type.
>141 dlphcoracl: yes, Nash's avant garde engravings look great, but I just don't think I could live with that grotesque type.
144assemblyman
>143 ubiquitousuk: A great buy though I didn’t take the plunge myself. David Jones’s engravings are fantastic and we’re my favourite of the three editions.
145ChampagneSVP
>143 ubiquitousuk: Folio sent out an email when it was down to 10 though
146dlphcoracl
>143 ubiquitousuk:
Rudolf Koch's Neuland type was the perfect pairing with Paul Nash's bold experimental woodcuts and the stark binding design. The elements come together in a unique way in which the sum is greater than any individual component, very similar to Bruce Roger's classic 1932 edition of Homer's Odyssey with the T. E. Lawrence translation. The Nonesuch Press 'Genesis' (1924) was decades ahead of its time, which is why collectors consider it a landmark 20th century edition. It may not be to your taste, but that is an entirely different issue.
Rudolf Koch's Neuland type was the perfect pairing with Paul Nash's bold experimental woodcuts and the stark binding design. The elements come together in a unique way in which the sum is greater than any individual component, very similar to Bruce Roger's classic 1932 edition of Homer's Odyssey with the T. E. Lawrence translation. The Nonesuch Press 'Genesis' (1924) was decades ahead of its time, which is why collectors consider it a landmark 20th century edition. It may not be to your taste, but that is an entirely different issue.
147affle
The recent flurry of posts led me to a quick review of this old - and entertaining - thread, and the realisation that the quote from the leaflets in these three books 'The first three facsimiles issued by the Folio Society in the Fine Press Classics series are all Old Testament texts,...' was a classic piece of FS misdirection. The Fine Press Classics series has proved to be exactly three books long. The books came out around the time of the omnichannelling, and I imagine ideas for further books left with JWB.
148kdweber
>147 affle: Well, they didn't exactly fly off the shelf. Most of their newer LEs sell out relatively quickly.
149laotzu225
They were quite decently priced when they came out and I'm happy to have the three. Many of my FS favorites are facsimiles.
150CobbsGhost
>148 kdweber:
I think that was the point. Folio went from printing rare editions of fine works, to printing cult classics in cool bindings. They are binding Netflix and/or classic works with large following...which is I guess, still Netflix. Whether or not the 'omnichanneling' was meant as a dig, it has proved helpful in sales, as you concur.
I think that was the point. Folio went from printing rare editions of fine works, to printing cult classics in cool bindings. They are binding Netflix and/or classic works with large following...which is I guess, still Netflix. Whether or not the 'omnichanneling' was meant as a dig, it has proved helpful in sales, as you concur.
151kdweber
>150 CobbsGhost:. I’d hardly call most on the new LE bindings cool. Maybe traditional or boring?
152SF-72
Quite frankly, to me it feels like several publishers can do what they've recently been doing, but nobody else did quite what they used to do for limited editions: As in high quality works that others wouldn't or couldn't publish, of really good quality in decently-priced editions. I miss that. No, they didn't sell out in a day, but they're just wonderful.
