This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1BuzzBuzzard
The LEC House of the Seven Gables is so very beautiful. It feels like a well designed book and looks like one. What material do you think is used for the book title upon the leather?
4BuzzBuzzard
>3 Django6924: Correct! I like the thought/creativity that went into details so small as this one. It truly makes the handcrafted item special. One reason that I find collecting 30's and 40's LECs so exciting.
5kdweber
>4 BuzzBuzzard: So which is it, Pt or Pd? Clearly doesn't tarnish. Palladium is considerably cheaper, though still fairly expensive.
6BuzzBuzzard
Palladium.
8MobyRichard
>5 kdweber:
Actually, Palladium is at the moment more expensive than Platinum. Worldwide, they started
building more auto catalytic converters that use Palladium and supplies are much tighter than with Platinum. Necessary info I know...
Actually, Palladium is at the moment more expensive than Platinum. Worldwide, they started
building more auto catalytic converters that use Palladium and supplies are much tighter than with Platinum. Necessary info I know...
9kdweber
>8 MobyRichard: However, in 1935 when The House of the Seven Gables was published by the LEC Pd was substantially cheaper than Pt.
10BuzzBuzzard
Either way Palladium did not help much and The House of the Seven Gables scored rock bottom 11th place in the ballots for the 6th series. Equally surprising to me Green Mansions took second place. I honestly think that the first HP edition of Green Mansions (sandglass 1A) is nicer than the LEC. And then one of my all time LEC favorites Typee ranking 6th. Why? What was not to their liking with Typee and the Seven Gables?
11Django6924
>10 BuzzBuzzard:
According to some of the comments on Typee which I remember reading in Files on Parade in later newsletters, many felt the tapa cloth binding was "cheap" and not befitting a "Limited Edition." I'm sure there were members who disapproved of the nudity in the illustrations and the descriptions of the unbridled behavior of the Marquesans. And, I believe based on comments in other Files on Parade, there was a certain racial/ethnic bias on the part of many subscribers towards Covarrubias.
As for the Hawthorne book, I can only think that most subscribers had never read the story, and that most of those who did didn't like it. It is one of Hawthorne's darkest, most complex works and doesn't have a strong, likable central character. Phoebe comes closest to meeting that requirement, but I find her rather 2-dimensional.
According to some of the comments on Typee which I remember reading in Files on Parade in later newsletters, many felt the tapa cloth binding was "cheap" and not befitting a "Limited Edition." I'm sure there were members who disapproved of the nudity in the illustrations and the descriptions of the unbridled behavior of the Marquesans. And, I believe based on comments in other Files on Parade, there was a certain racial/ethnic bias on the part of many subscribers towards Covarrubias.
As for the Hawthorne book, I can only think that most subscribers had never read the story, and that most of those who did didn't like it. It is one of Hawthorne's darkest, most complex works and doesn't have a strong, likable central character. Phoebe comes closest to meeting that requirement, but I find her rather 2-dimensional.
12BuzzBuzzard
>11 Django6924: I am not sure if most subscribers have either not read or did not like the Hawthorne book. The monthly letter states - On several occasions now, we have asked you patient members of this Club what books you want us to issue in well-illustrated editions for you. On each of these occasions, there has been resounding ballot cast for a well-illustrated edition of The House of the seven Gables. I started reading the story yesterday and noticed that the paper is nicely watermarked - Hawthorne & Worthy. Strangely there is no mention about this in the letter.
Don didn't like the tapa cloth for Typee either. While it is possible that others disapproved of it as well I find it original and quite lovely.
Don didn't like the tapa cloth for Typee either. While it is possible that others disapproved of it as well I find it original and quite lovely.
13Django6924
>12 BuzzBuzzard: "he tapa cloth for Typee either. While it is possible that others disapproved of it as well I find it original and quite lovely."
One of my favorites!!!
One of my favorites!!!
14jveezer
I love that Typee edition. I'm always on the lookout for it and didn't have the necessary funds the one time I found a nice copy. Such is the life of a book opportunist!
15wcarter
>13 Django6924:>14
I agree. Beautiful edition with lovely appropriate binding.
On the strength of the book I visited the a Marquesas in French Polynesia last year. Hard to get to, but magically unspoilt when you do.
I agree. Beautiful edition with lovely appropriate binding.
On the strength of the book I visited the a Marquesas in French Polynesia last year. Hard to get to, but magically unspoilt when you do.
16Django6924
>14 jveezer:
The amusing thing is, that so many of the books, such as Typee, which were dismissed by the subscribers in the polls, and now usually among the harder-to-find and more expensive editions, and the poll leaders then are often not-highly regarded by collectors today (such as Green mansions, as Vasil mentioned).
>15 wcarter: " I visited the Marquesas in French Polynesia last year"
Lucky!!!! I love Hawaii, but I have to go to the parts unspoiled by tourists, of which there are few).
The amusing thing is, that so many of the books, such as Typee, which were dismissed by the subscribers in the polls, and now usually among the harder-to-find and more expensive editions, and the poll leaders then are often not-highly regarded by collectors today (such as Green mansions, as Vasil mentioned).
>15 wcarter: " I visited the Marquesas in French Polynesia last year"
Lucky!!!! I love Hawaii, but I have to go to the parts unspoiled by tourists, of which there are few).
17BuzzBuzzard
I wonder would we have had different opinions had we have to purchase every LEC at the same price. Say $200 for example. As another example the "Spanish" Don Quixote scored 8 with only 19 virst place votes. At the same time subscibers were in love with imposing two volume sets like Pickwick (1st place with 144 first place votes).
18Django6924
>17 BuzzBuzzard:
I can't understand the lack of enthusiasm for the Don--the translation I still find the most accurate, the illustrations are first-rate, and the paper is one of the best in that series. I'll have to read comments in the Files on Parade section of subsequent MLs to see what negative comments it received.
EDITED TO ADD: After reading the comments, in the ML for The Brothers Karamazov, I suppose the weight of the 2 volumes was probably the major complaint about Don Quixote, but I believe this isn't the real reason for the lack of enthusiasm. As the ML points out, the top 3 choices were printed in England, and numbers 1 and 3 were Dickens and Shakespeare, so I suspect a bit of literary chauvinism at work. The rest of the rankings are also a bit puzzling to me: I would put Don Quixote, The Four Gospels and The Golden Ass in the top 3 positions and the François Villon at least in the top 5. I've never seen a copy of the Chinese-printed Analects nor Bruce Rogers' Aesop, but I believe the first is as indifferently produced (under admittedly horrible conditions) as the latter is superbly printed, but probably neither exciting from a design or literary standpoint, and so they would probably be in my bottom third of the list. I have seen a copy of Gill's Hamlet and the Kemble illustrated Huck Finn, and don't really care for either, because of the illustrations, and in the case of Hamlet, the rather odd typographical plan.
I can't understand the lack of enthusiasm for the Don--the translation I still find the most accurate, the illustrations are first-rate, and the paper is one of the best in that series. I'll have to read comments in the Files on Parade section of subsequent MLs to see what negative comments it received.
EDITED TO ADD: After reading the comments, in the ML for The Brothers Karamazov, I suppose the weight of the 2 volumes was probably the major complaint about Don Quixote, but I believe this isn't the real reason for the lack of enthusiasm. As the ML points out, the top 3 choices were printed in England, and numbers 1 and 3 were Dickens and Shakespeare, so I suspect a bit of literary chauvinism at work. The rest of the rankings are also a bit puzzling to me: I would put Don Quixote, The Four Gospels and The Golden Ass in the top 3 positions and the François Villon at least in the top 5. I've never seen a copy of the Chinese-printed Analects nor Bruce Rogers' Aesop, but I believe the first is as indifferently produced (under admittedly horrible conditions) as the latter is superbly printed, but probably neither exciting from a design or literary standpoint, and so they would probably be in my bottom third of the list. I have seen a copy of Gill's Hamlet and the Kemble illustrated Huck Finn, and don't really care for either, because of the illustrations, and in the case of Hamlet, the rather odd typographical plan.
19BuzzBuzzard
>18 Django6924: Believe it or not one of the complains about Don Quixote was that the paper was too luxurious and thick! The same subscribers did not like Brothers Karamazov much either, which is a whole other topic.
20featherwate
>18 Django6924:
"...I believe [.............] Bruce Rogers' Aesop is superbly printed, but probably neither exciting from a design or literary standpoint"
I suspect George Macy was afraid of this - that his subscribers might undervalue the book because it followed on the heels of two more imposing titles, was one of the few LECs not to have illustrations by a living artist, and might even be regarded by some as a children's book. His reaction was to make the Monthly Letter a love letter to Bruce Rogers, whom he genuinely admired and whom he was justifiably proud to have in the LEC community.
And in truth Rogers was pretty much the alpha and omega of the book. The colophon calls him its 'arranger', a more extensive role than designer. It was he who proposed the Aesop to Macy, after being shown a rare illustrated sixteenth century edition of the Fables belonging to his friend and colleague, Wilfred Merton{1}. Rogers had been much taken by the book's lively woodcuts – there were nearly 50 of them - and thought them worth matching to an English text. Macy describes how they agreed to use Samuel Croxall's 1722 translation and then goes on to detail Rogers's involvement in almost every aspect of the book's production. Rogers had the woodcuts photographed, and re-drew them to produce the necessary plates for printing. He then chose to have the text hand-set in Fell, 'a large, also archaic, homely and pleasant type' that was the exclusive property of the Oxford University Press. He personally supervised both the manufacture of the Barham Green paper (superb) and the OUP's printers (miraculously without upsetting their proud and formidable head, Dr John Johnson).
As a typographical bonne bouche, a sort of precursor of what in today's digital world would be called an Easter Egg, Rogers set the half-title, a single line, with old letters that he assured Macy had once been owned by Benjamin Franklin himself. (Unfortunately, my re-bound copy lacks this particular page with its tangible link to the past; then again, if it had not been re-bound I wouldn't have been able to buy it for less than a third of the book's usual asking price...)
I like the book. Rogers's aim seems to have been to produce a book for adults, one that reflects the fact that the fables aren't just entertaining stories, but provide serious moral guidance. The result is a sober volume, but far from a dull one.
Incidentally, Macy's focus on Bruce Rogers led him into an uncharacteristic discourtesy: the Monthly Letter says nothing of Victor Scholderer, the British Museum's world-renowned expert on early printed books, who both assisted Bruce Rogers and wrote the LEC's introduction.
{1} The Monthly Letter mentions Wilfred Merton without identifying him (except uninformatively as an associate of the firm of Sir Emery Walker, who isn't identified either, and playfully, almost insultingly, as having once been 'a tyke in London' who probably neither owned nor was interested in books). Merton was in fact a respected - but not universally popular - Dublin-born engraver and an assiduous collector of old manuscripts and books (which may explain why he bought the illustrated Aesop).
Emery Walker was a notable process-engraver and typographical expert. An 'affectionate comrade' of William Morris, he had been a key figure in the establishment and running of the Kelmscott Press, a co-founder of the Doves Press, a leading member of the Arts & Crafts movement and one of the most influential typographers of the twentieth century. In 1928 he, Merton and Rogers had come together to publish what would become one of the 20th century's most sought-after private press books: Lawrence of Arabia's pseudonymous (and spicily aromatic) translation of The Odyssey, which did not appear until November 1932.
With this edition of Aesop's Fables, Rogers and Macy began a lifelong association, but there was to be only one further link between the LEC and Rogers's two partners. This was in 1937. The Harry Ransom Center's GMI archive entry for what would become the 1941 Pilgrim's Progress records a 1939 correspondence with Emery Walker, Ltd, a long established and highly regarded firm of 'process and general engravers, draughtsmen, map-constructors, and photographers of works of art'. Walker himself had died in 1933 and the firm had passed under the control of Wilfred Merton. I haven't seen the Monthly Letter for Pilgrim's Progress, so I can only guess that the firm had been approached (or had offered) to photograph the originals of William Blake's illustrations.
"...I believe [.............] Bruce Rogers' Aesop is superbly printed, but probably neither exciting from a design or literary standpoint"
I suspect George Macy was afraid of this - that his subscribers might undervalue the book because it followed on the heels of two more imposing titles, was one of the few LECs not to have illustrations by a living artist, and might even be regarded by some as a children's book. His reaction was to make the Monthly Letter a love letter to Bruce Rogers, whom he genuinely admired and whom he was justifiably proud to have in the LEC community.
And in truth Rogers was pretty much the alpha and omega of the book. The colophon calls him its 'arranger', a more extensive role than designer. It was he who proposed the Aesop to Macy, after being shown a rare illustrated sixteenth century edition of the Fables belonging to his friend and colleague, Wilfred Merton{1}. Rogers had been much taken by the book's lively woodcuts – there were nearly 50 of them - and thought them worth matching to an English text. Macy describes how they agreed to use Samuel Croxall's 1722 translation and then goes on to detail Rogers's involvement in almost every aspect of the book's production. Rogers had the woodcuts photographed, and re-drew them to produce the necessary plates for printing. He then chose to have the text hand-set in Fell, 'a large, also archaic, homely and pleasant type' that was the exclusive property of the Oxford University Press. He personally supervised both the manufacture of the Barham Green paper (superb) and the OUP's printers (miraculously without upsetting their proud and formidable head, Dr John Johnson).
As a typographical bonne bouche, a sort of precursor of what in today's digital world would be called an Easter Egg, Rogers set the half-title, a single line, with old letters that he assured Macy had once been owned by Benjamin Franklin himself. (Unfortunately, my re-bound copy lacks this particular page with its tangible link to the past; then again, if it had not been re-bound I wouldn't have been able to buy it for less than a third of the book's usual asking price...)
I like the book. Rogers's aim seems to have been to produce a book for adults, one that reflects the fact that the fables aren't just entertaining stories, but provide serious moral guidance. The result is a sober volume, but far from a dull one.
Incidentally, Macy's focus on Bruce Rogers led him into an uncharacteristic discourtesy: the Monthly Letter says nothing of Victor Scholderer, the British Museum's world-renowned expert on early printed books, who both assisted Bruce Rogers and wrote the LEC's introduction.
{1} The Monthly Letter mentions Wilfred Merton without identifying him (except uninformatively as an associate of the firm of Sir Emery Walker, who isn't identified either, and playfully, almost insultingly, as having once been 'a tyke in London' who probably neither owned nor was interested in books). Merton was in fact a respected - but not universally popular - Dublin-born engraver and an assiduous collector of old manuscripts and books (which may explain why he bought the illustrated Aesop).
Emery Walker was a notable process-engraver and typographical expert. An 'affectionate comrade' of William Morris, he had been a key figure in the establishment and running of the Kelmscott Press, a co-founder of the Doves Press, a leading member of the Arts & Crafts movement and one of the most influential typographers of the twentieth century. In 1928 he, Merton and Rogers had come together to publish what would become one of the 20th century's most sought-after private press books: Lawrence of Arabia's pseudonymous (and spicily aromatic) translation of The Odyssey, which did not appear until November 1932.
With this edition of Aesop's Fables, Rogers and Macy began a lifelong association, but there was to be only one further link between the LEC and Rogers's two partners. This was in 1937. The Harry Ransom Center's GMI archive entry for what would become the 1941 Pilgrim's Progress records a 1939 correspondence with Emery Walker, Ltd, a long established and highly regarded firm of 'process and general engravers, draughtsmen, map-constructors, and photographers of works of art'. Walker himself had died in 1933 and the firm had passed under the control of Wilfred Merton. I haven't seen the Monthly Letter for Pilgrim's Progress, so I can only guess that the firm had been approached (or had offered) to photograph the originals of William Blake's illustrations.
21Django6924
>20 featherwate:
Great information, Jack. I'm sure I would appreciate the book could I afford it. I'd be interested to know what you think of the illustrations. It has always been intriguing how Bruce Rogers was long wooed and finally won by Macy, and agreed to make several contributions to the Macy companies, when his own tastes seemed to have not run to illustrated books.
Although these fables are often amusing, I suspect it is their strong tone of what you rightly describe as "moral guidance" which has made me value them less from a literary standpoint. If I'm going to be lectured, it better have a high quotient of entertainment value--such as Gulliver's Travels and Candide. The two copies of Aesop which I own provide this via the illustrations: a 1933 edition illustrated by Boris Artzybasheff and a 1966 OUP edition which uses the illustrations J.J. Grandville made for a 19th century edition of the Fables of Jean de La Fontaine.
Great information, Jack. I'm sure I would appreciate the book could I afford it. I'd be interested to know what you think of the illustrations. It has always been intriguing how Bruce Rogers was long wooed and finally won by Macy, and agreed to make several contributions to the Macy companies, when his own tastes seemed to have not run to illustrated books.
Although these fables are often amusing, I suspect it is their strong tone of what you rightly describe as "moral guidance" which has made me value them less from a literary standpoint. If I'm going to be lectured, it better have a high quotient of entertainment value--such as Gulliver's Travels and Candide. The two copies of Aesop which I own provide this via the illustrations: a 1933 edition illustrated by Boris Artzybasheff and a 1966 OUP edition which uses the illustrations J.J. Grandville made for a 19th century edition of the Fables of Jean de La Fontaine.
22gmacaree
>14 jveezer: I got mine for $20 a couple years ago -- the seller spelled 'limited' incorrectly in the listing so it didn't trip anyone's searches!
23featherwate
>21 Django6924:
I've seen Grandville's Fontaine Fables and have a couple of reprints of 19thC French short stories which he illustrated. They were published as Miniature Books by the short-lived Rodale Press, whose Story Classics series includes GMDs and Fine Press Forum members among its fans - there was a flurry of interest in it four or five years ago. He certainly has an attractively off-beat talent, akin to those of Richard Doyle and the poor mad Richard Dadd (but less intense than the latter).
I'm less familiar with Artzybasheff's work. At one time I admired him for his pinscreen illustrations (and animations), only to discover I'd confused him with Alexandre Alexeieff... But I am sure he did illustrate the 1939 Heritage Press Droll Stories, a book which might have enthralled me on the cusp of puberty but for which I can't now summon any enthusiasm whatever. I also know there is an entry in the Harry Ransom archives that suggests that Artzybasheff might have been Macy's first choice to illustrate Hajji Baba. They appear to have corresponded from 1932 through 1934 but no commission ensued, and when the project was revived after World War Two the job went to Honoré Guilbeau. Something similar seems to have happened with Bluebeard (1952) and The Satyricon (1964). They appeared with artwork by Hans Bendix and Antonio Sotomayer respectively. In both cases, of course, it may have been that neither book appealed to Artzybasheff. I'll look out for some examples of his work. A quick glance suggests he commands a wide range of styles!
I'll see if I can photograph some of the Aesop LEC illustrations, but the rebinding makes it difficult to flatten out the pages.
I've seen Grandville's Fontaine Fables and have a couple of reprints of 19thC French short stories which he illustrated. They were published as Miniature Books by the short-lived Rodale Press, whose Story Classics series includes GMDs and Fine Press Forum members among its fans - there was a flurry of interest in it four or five years ago. He certainly has an attractively off-beat talent, akin to those of Richard Doyle and the poor mad Richard Dadd (but less intense than the latter).
I'm less familiar with Artzybasheff's work. At one time I admired him for his pinscreen illustrations (and animations), only to discover I'd confused him with Alexandre Alexeieff... But I am sure he did illustrate the 1939 Heritage Press Droll Stories, a book which might have enthralled me on the cusp of puberty but for which I can't now summon any enthusiasm whatever. I also know there is an entry in the Harry Ransom archives that suggests that Artzybasheff might have been Macy's first choice to illustrate Hajji Baba. They appear to have corresponded from 1932 through 1934 but no commission ensued, and when the project was revived after World War Two the job went to Honoré Guilbeau. Something similar seems to have happened with Bluebeard (1952) and The Satyricon (1964). They appeared with artwork by Hans Bendix and Antonio Sotomayer respectively. In both cases, of course, it may have been that neither book appealed to Artzybasheff. I'll look out for some examples of his work. A quick glance suggests he commands a wide range of styles!
I'll see if I can photograph some of the Aesop LEC illustrations, but the rebinding makes it difficult to flatten out the pages.
25featherwate
>24 EclecticIndulgence:
Thanks for the tip! though I have to say that Claire Van Vliet's Lao is one of my favourite LECs, but there's always room for another good'un.
Thanks for the tip! though I have to say that Claire Van Vliet's Lao is one of my favourite LECs, but there's always room for another good'un.
26Django6924
>23 featherwate:
I second both EclecticIndulgence's recommendation >24 EclecticIndulgence:, and your endorsement of Van Vliet's Dr Lao--Finney was very lucky to have two such talented illustrators.
I posted several examples of Artzybasheff's work here:
http://www.librarything.com/topic/260905#6103895
I second both EclecticIndulgence's recommendation >24 EclecticIndulgence:, and your endorsement of Van Vliet's Dr Lao--Finney was very lucky to have two such talented illustrators.
I posted several examples of Artzybasheff's work here:
http://www.librarything.com/topic/260905#6103895
27featherwate
>26 Django6924:
Thanks, Robert - an interesting cross-section of his work. There's a definite touch of Hieronymus Bosch about his illustrations for Dr Lao; and the jacket must be one of the most effective cover designs ever. Lucky Mr Finney, as you say!
I quite like his Aesop illustrations, especially those fluent lines of the long-necked birds and the fox; I find the pictures of the goose and the lion rather overwhelming, though that may just be from seeing them in isolation from the text. But I love his colour work in the Colum book! Colum I remember from childhood being a favourite of my Irish grandmother, tho I can't recall particular titles. Looking at some of his work on the net he was another writer lucky with his collaborators - there's a fabulous book of Northern myths illustrated by Willy Pogani which I must, but probably won't, resist....thank you, I think, for the (indirect) enablement!
Re the unlikely bedfellowship of George and Bruce: in his biography of Rogers (punningly subtitled A Life in Letters) Joseph Blumenthal suggests it arose out of their respect for one another's particular skills, their shared aim "to achieve significant bookmaking" and "Macy's support (if reluctant at times) of BR's costly pursuit of infinite detail." Blumenthal also mentions that Rogers and Wilfred Merton originally intended to publish the Aesop themselves, using only the 45 fables of the original book. Then Rogers showed a sample page to Macy who promptly took over the project, consulted Victor Scholderer, added another 150 fables and promised BR a free hand as designer, typographer etc. No wonder Rogers took to him!
Illustrations play a significant part in only half of the 12 commissions he accepted from the LEC: Aesop's Fables, Wind in the Willows, the Shakespeare plays, Plato's Republic, Frost's Poems and L'Allegro. OK, there are 37 Shakespeare volumes, but despite seeing the illustrations as simply interruptions to the text, especially distracting as each play had a different artist, Rogers had to accept they were essential to the financial viability of the project. And the series's lasting impact does surely derive from his contributions - binding, layout and typeface. The illustrations are a bonus (although not in every volume!) but it remains a designer's triumph.
And true to his beliefs (or to salve his conscience!), he insisted on his own set being bound without the illustrations...
Thanks, Robert - an interesting cross-section of his work. There's a definite touch of Hieronymus Bosch about his illustrations for Dr Lao; and the jacket must be one of the most effective cover designs ever. Lucky Mr Finney, as you say!
I quite like his Aesop illustrations, especially those fluent lines of the long-necked birds and the fox; I find the pictures of the goose and the lion rather overwhelming, though that may just be from seeing them in isolation from the text. But I love his colour work in the Colum book! Colum I remember from childhood being a favourite of my Irish grandmother, tho I can't recall particular titles. Looking at some of his work on the net he was another writer lucky with his collaborators - there's a fabulous book of Northern myths illustrated by Willy Pogani which I must, but probably won't, resist....thank you, I think, for the (indirect) enablement!
Re the unlikely bedfellowship of George and Bruce: in his biography of Rogers (punningly subtitled A Life in Letters) Joseph Blumenthal suggests it arose out of their respect for one another's particular skills, their shared aim "to achieve significant bookmaking" and "Macy's support (if reluctant at times) of BR's costly pursuit of infinite detail." Blumenthal also mentions that Rogers and Wilfred Merton originally intended to publish the Aesop themselves, using only the 45 fables of the original book. Then Rogers showed a sample page to Macy who promptly took over the project, consulted Victor Scholderer, added another 150 fables and promised BR a free hand as designer, typographer etc. No wonder Rogers took to him!
Illustrations play a significant part in only half of the 12 commissions he accepted from the LEC: Aesop's Fables, Wind in the Willows, the Shakespeare plays, Plato's Republic, Frost's Poems and L'Allegro. OK, there are 37 Shakespeare volumes, but despite seeing the illustrations as simply interruptions to the text, especially distracting as each play had a different artist, Rogers had to accept they were essential to the financial viability of the project. And the series's lasting impact does surely derive from his contributions - binding, layout and typeface. The illustrations are a bonus (although not in every volume!) but it remains a designer's triumph.
And true to his beliefs (or to salve his conscience!), he insisted on his own set being bound without the illustrations...
28Django6924
>27 featherwate: "And true to his beliefs (or to salve his conscience!), he insisted on his own set being bound without the illustrations..."
I didn't know that! Stands to reason, though. I still think the illustrations--even some of the less-than-inspired ones--are one of the glories of the set, providing an fascinating survey of most of the major book illustrators of the first half of the 20th century.
I didn't know that! Stands to reason, though. I still think the illustrations--even some of the less-than-inspired ones--are one of the glories of the set, providing an fascinating survey of most of the major book illustrators of the first half of the 20th century.
Join to post
