Fine Press Collecting - Then & Now

Hello,

I am relatively new to collecting fine press books. I started collecting hardcovers of the books I wanted to read. This then led me to special editions from the likes of The Broken Binding, which in turn led me to limited editions from Subterranean Press and Folio Society, which then finally led me to fine press and letterpress books through Curious King and Conversation Tree Press. I have now discovered a love for handmade and letterpressed poetry books, books that this forum actively enables me to buy.

I suspect that a lot of the new collectors, like me, discovered fine press through science fiction and fantasy books getting the fine press treatment. This could lead people to discover amazing editions of their favourite books or series, e.g. CKs Hyperion and First Law, CTPs Foundation and Solaris, Centipede Press's Dune (not fine press I know, but I think this still had an effect). Curious King had their fastest ever sell-out with the release of Assassin's Apprentice in July this year. Next March they will do Red Rising which is massively popular and it is a book that I think is going to bring a lot of eyeballs on fine press and a lot of pressure on the secondary market. There is even a rumor that a broker of fine press offers $5000 for Publishers Rights from Curious King. I read a post on this forum estimating that there were about 100 presses and 1000 collectors in fine press. I suspect this will increase in 2026.

This long ramble is all for me to ask:

How has collecting fine press books changed while you've been collecting?
Has it always been this competitive?
Has the trend of fine press treatment for science fiction and fantasy affected the market in any meaningful way?

Also; if you're new like me or have been collecting for years, how did you start collecting fine press?

>1 7om: Wow, it’s almost like I’m reading a story about myself! My path has been identical to yours. I restarted my reading hobby after a break of about 10–15 years, roughly two years ago. At first, I read only a few books over several months, and from there the pace gradually picked up. I think I actually began with audiobooks because the service provider was offering a great discount on the monthly subscription.

I started by returning to the books of my youth—Forgotten Realms—and from there moved on to other sci-fi and fantasy classics, such as the LOTR, Farseer Trilogy etc. not forgetting new publications e.g. Three Body Problem. At first, I searched for those old classics on marketplaces and auction sites, until I eventually began reading in English as well (my native language is Finnish). That’s when I discovered The Broken Binding and joined their Fantasy Subscription. Through them, I learned that booktubers were a whole phenomenon! I started following and watching review videos, which eventually led me to the world of fine press books.

At first, I bought editions from The Folio Society, such as Game of Thrones, Dune, and lately one of my favourite books, Piranesi. After that, I found even higher-end publishers like Lyra’s Books, Curious King, Conversation Tree Press, Centipede Press, Suntup, and others, even more expensive ones. I was amazed by how beautifully and skillfully a book could be made—and I’ve been hooked on these productions ever since. I cancelled my Broken Binding subscription and decided that I would rather buy fewer books each year but focus on higher quality.

Right now, I have a couple of books from Curious King on the way (The Martian and Assassin’s Apprentice), both standard editions. I’ve admired Lyra’s Books from the beginning—Stardust is an absolutely fantastic production and one of my favourite stories, and I now got lucky in the lottery for the Numbered edition of Don’t Look Now with rights. Thanks to recommendations from the booktuber, Too Many Books, I managed to acquire a secondary-market copy of Centipede Press’s edition of The Club Dumas (one of my favourite films), and the illustrations in it are incredible.

P.S. Next you’ll tell me that you also live in Finland and are my neighbour.

>2 DeviousMouse: I live in Norway so I am your neighbour!

Our journey has been pretty much exact, down to the same books, the same pre-orders from CK, even the same lottery winners from Lyra's (though I decided to pass on it). I have also stopped buying non fine press books and prioritize quality over quantity.

I wonder how many others have had similar journeys and I wonder if this influx of collectors will have a positive impact on the fine press community.

I have been buying Folio books for decades, eventually straying into their LEs. Mappa Mundi and the Lutrell Psalter were my first two. Over on the FSD forum, they had posts back then of beautiful rebindings by Richard Tong, so when there was a post about him releasing Stardust, I immediately made contact and secured a reservation for the numbered edition. That first Lyra's edition was my gateway drug into fine press. A few months later, I was looking for a nice edition of Pepe's diaries, after missing out on a deal for Folio's LE. I stumbled on a reasonably priced LEC version and liked what I saw. Soon I was deep down the LEC rabbit hole. LEC eventually led to Bruce Rogers, then to British Private Presses, then to the Book Club of California and from there to American Private Presses. It's been a fun 6 years on this fine press journey, with few regrets, other than the lack of space to put more.

>3 7om: Amazing! As they say in Red Rising: “My brother!” What an incredible coincidence that our paths resemble each other’s so much.
We must now found the Nordic Fine Press Club!

>4 Chemren: Wow! You are incredibly lucky to have secured a numbered edition of Stardust, well done! What a masterpiece it is—at least based on the photos, reviews, and comments I’ve seen. I haven’t been as fortunate to see it in person.
This is one of those productions that won’t appear on the market very often, and if it ever does show up on the secondary market, the price will be so high that very few people will be able to afford it!

That’s why I feel very lucky to be able to hop aboard the Lyra’s Books train now with latest lottery.

Those presses you mentioned are not familiar to me — I’ll start looking into them.

"Has the trend of fine press treatment for science fiction and fantasy affected the market in any meaningful way?"

I do think it's skewed fine press to a particular way of thinking and a particular type of collector. I'm not offering a value judgement on this as fine press needs to reach out to survive and scifi needs to be paid its due. But the whole feel shifts. I can see this from digging in the archives to research interesting topics on this forum. This shift from a collector coming from say a love of classical Latin / Greek literature direction, for example, versus a collector coming from a scifi forum is a radical shift. Of course there are many collectors happy to dip into all styles and types of literature but many don't. Even on CP forum there was a clear movement in the direction of scifi which was only changed once costs were considered. This changes the fabric of fine press. I see two main pipelines into fine press:

1) paperback collector, to hardback, to FS/Suntup, to fine press
2) Scifi/fantasy collector to fine press.

The rest seem to be the old school style of collector and the professionals who work in fine press.

>7 LT79-1: Easton Press-> Limited Editions Club -> Broader Fine Press World

Like most people in this forum, i also discovered fine press collecting through my love of scifi and fantasy (to a lesser extent) stories about 20 years ago. Collecting limited edition and rare scifi/fantasy novels and children's stores was a hobby I happily shared with my mother during the last few years of her life. Once she passed I stopped collecting for the most part, but I recently picked it up again. In terms of modern "fine" press, I started with Easton Press where I was overjoyed to subscribe to the Signed First Editions of Science Fiction series, and then added Folio Society, Subterranean Press, Centipede Press, Earthling Publications, and Cemetery Dance, and most recently Conversation Tree Press. My oldest daughter benefited from these beautiful editions during story time before bed, and she's been developing an interest in this hobby with me as she has grown into an adult.

I guess I'm one of those "old school style of collector and the professionals who work in fine press," having gotten into fine press books way back in the 1970s when I was working in the library at the University of Wyoming as an OP acquisitions clerk. Part of my job was reading dealer catalogues, so my interest was initially in the private press movement and the presses of the past and present (at the time): Kelmscott, Ashendene, Doves, Eragny, Essex House, Cuala, Nonesuch, Grabhorn, John Henry Nash, Allen Press, etc., etc. It spread to smaller private presses eventually. I was a charter subscriber to Fine Print, a journal dedicated to the book arts, and my horizons expanded further. I'm still focused on the past, and these current presses you mention really are of little interest to me as I have my hands full with historical presses and you have to draw the line somewhere. But...you guys need to check out No Reply Press and Sutton Hoo/The Last Press. Griffin and Chad do superb work, not to be missed.

It seems to me that Paul Suntup built a bridge between the "genre press" and "fine press" communities which has been really beneficial to both. More bridges are being built all the time. Each new press of any sort is a boon to us all.

The online fine press communities pull a lot of voices from this crossover, so it's easy to get the impression that this was an BC-to-AD level event. That's not really the case. Fine press exists largely as it did 10+ years ago. Gaylord Schanilec, Russell Maret, Abigail Rorer, Sarah Horowitz – fine press touchstones you'll rarely see mentioned here – continue making breathtaking books. Arion and Thornwillow continue to publish using traditional crafts. Private presses abound in basements and garages. I'd say that the "genre fine presses" (for lack of a better term) have added to, but not changed, fine press. Put another way, much has been gained but nothing lost!

>11 grifgon: Well, as usual, mi amigo, your observations are cogent and accurate. I collected quite a few of those "genre" presses (Don Grant, Underwood/Miller, FAX Collector's Editions, White Wolf, etc.) at one time, and would concur that Suntup bridged the gap.

The Folio Society is another bridging publisher that has drawn many people through from quality trade hardbacks to The Folio Society standard editions, then to Folio Society limited editions and finally true fine press publishers. A smaller number have progressed further and proceeded down the private press rabbit hole.

Wow, thanks for all your interesting replies to my questions!

>13 wcarter: What would you say were the differences between fine press and private press?

>14 7om:

Fine press: produces fine books

Private press: publisher and bookmaker are the same person

Both terms admit degrees, but I think that pretty much sums it up.

>14 7om:
To add slightly more to what >15 grifgon: said:-
Private Press publishers are a subset of “Fine Press” printers, and are usually run by a very small number of people and they print for a regular clientele of subscribers.

>16 wcarter: As far as fine press is concerned (this is the fine press forum after all!) you're absolutely right.

However, generally speaking, "private press" is not a subset of "fine press," but rather a distinct category with its own history. A private press need not be a fine press. I have many private press books on my shelves with atrocious printing, for example. (Of course, the very finest printing on my shelves is also from private presses! They run the gamut!)

>14 7om: Allow me to jump in here.

A private press is one that is owned & operated by one or two people, often a couple like H. George Webb and his wife, Hesba who operated the Caradoc Press in the early 1900s. Private press proprietors publish whatever material they desire; rarely is making a profit a major consideration. The work, from design to printing to binding, is usually done in-house. Printing is not limited to letterpress and the quality of the typography and printing may not be of the highest quality. These presses reflect the personalities of the owners, some more so than others!

Operating a private press requires money, and press proprietors have had many means for providing that cash. Some were well off and had the funds to subsidize their printing passion. Melbert B. Cary, Jr., proprietor of the Press of the Woolly Whale, for example, came from a prominent family and married a Standard Oil heiress. Others, not so fortunate, often ran a commercial job shop to support their less commercial projects and quite a few utilized grants for that extra bit of funding. In the early days in Missoula, Montana, Peter Koch and his first wife, Shelley Hoyt-Koch, operated such a shop to support Black Stone Press, their private press effort, and they got a few grants as well. Many private presses have been more or less a hobby of the proprietors, but that is not to say that they shouldn't be taken seriously.

A fine press focuses on producing works to high standards of typography/book design, printing, and binding using the finest materials. Many private presses also qualify as fine presses. Many people consider that in order to be a fine press book, it must be printed letterpress, but others think that the printing technology itself is secondary, and include methods other than letterpress. Books printed by offset, digital printers and silk screen have been accorded the fine press label. What is important is that the standards are set high and the materials used are also of high quality. You will find more commercially minded ventures under the fine press umbrella, with many "presses" being a publisher with the actual work being contracted out to others. The Limited Editions Club was one such with Conversation Tree Press and Nawakum Press being among current such operations. The results are unquestionably fine press books.

No Reply Press is one example of a private press which is also a fine press, but there are many others, both past and present.

In both private and fine press, the number of copies produced tend to be low for practical reasons; 100-200 copies is not unusual, although the edition size can be higher---or lower---such as the Limited Editions Club whose print runs normally were limited to 1500 copies.

I hope that answers your question.

P. S. Welcome to fine press 7om! It's a fabulous community and there's no wrong way to collect. I hope you're having a ball like I am!!

>18 Glacierman: Terrific summary!

>13 wcarter: This is actually a valid point: it doesn’t matter where you begin. But to reach the deep end — in this case, fine / private press — you need to go through the Folio Society gateway.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for the excellent book reviews and photos you share on the forum. They are always very interesting to read, and they increase our knowledge — not only about books, but also about the presses behind them.

>20 DeviousMouse: But to reach the deep end — in this case, fine / private press — you need to go through the Folio Society gateway.

Well, that's one route, but there are many others. FS came to my attention long after I had discovered press books.

>14 7om: With apologies to Glacierman, who has already made many of the same points, here’s my take (extracted from an old essay) on the Private / Fine distinction. It’s written from the viewpoint of another old-school style of collector, ie mainly focussed on classic British 20th century private press, and with no mention of content or genre since I’m a disciple of that slightly weird tradition where enthusiasm for books considered as fine craft objects come first, their content a distant second.

A note should be made (or rather attempted) regarding the distinction between ‘private press’ and ‘fine printing’, which although appearing clear enough in principle conceals a large grey area of middle ground. In reality, very few presses sit entirely comfortably within the strictest definition of a private press, the essential elements of which are printing purely for the craft’s sake rather than with a profit motive, all design and production being done in-house by the proprietor plus perhaps an assistant or two, and the proprietor additionally fulfilling the role of publisher by exercising sole control and discretion over the choice of material. Such ‘pure’ private presses – essentially ‘printing for pleasure’ - were the norm both in the pre-Kelmscott era, and once again became relatively common amongst the modest hobbyist-endeavours which had their roots in the austerity of the immediate post-war period.

In contrast, with the possible exception of the Ashendene Press (especially in its early years), most of the presses discussed here (viz: Kelmscott, Doves, Ashendene, Gregynog, Golden Cockerel, Shakespeare Head, Cresset, Nonesuch, Cranach, Officina Bodoni, Stanbrook Abbey, Raamin) were at heart commercial enterprises and while profit may not have been the principle motive they certainly could not entertain the prospect of operating at a loss. Furthermore, although outsourcing of at least some of the various specialised aspects of book design and production (most commonly the binding) was near-universal, outsourcing of the printing itself (for example by the post-1933 Golden Cockerel Press and the Nonesuch Press throughout its life) undoubtedly strains the definition of any form of ‘press’, let alone a private press, near enough to breaking point. In these cases, the outsourced ‘private press’ model tended to meet and mingle with the movement of ‘fine printing’ coming from the opposite direction, that is to say from commercial publishers wishing to emulate the quality of private press books by commissioning the best trade printers. These printers were often the exact same companies as those commissioned by outsourcing from supposedly private presses, and thus the blurring around this mid-point resulted in several instances where fine press books originating from commercial publishers exceeded the level of quality and ambition of books from nominally ‘private’ presses.

In more recent times, use of the hybrid term ‘fine press’ has grown, as the private press label seems now to have become associated more with the famous presses of the past than with contemporary printing. Fine press is perhaps a useful catch-all to describe the rich profusion of modern craft printers, whether grand or modest, although in fact the old subtle distinctions between ‘private’ and ‘fine’ are just as valid today. To add another layer of complication, the creeping obsolescence and final demise of letterpress printing – for many years a sine qua non of private press books - as a viable commercial technology towards the end of the twentieth century has added new vigour to the perennial argument regarding the appropriate technology choices for ‘fine printing’. These debates began with Morris and continue today, with a few variations to encompass a further 130 years of technology innovation. Finally, the distinction between private press and artists’ books, never entirely clear-cut, has become still more blurred in the contemporary fine press world where text, image and overall book design will often exhibit both craft and artistry to various degrees expressed in a multiplicity of media, sometimes within a single book.

>21 Glacierman: Folio Society was never part of my fine press journey either. Generally speaking, I don’t rate Folio Society, and own very little of theirs.

>22 BillWoodbridge: Thanks a lot for this excerpt! I'm particularly fascinated by this section:

"...outsourcing of the printing itself (for example by the post-1933 Golden Cockerel Press and the Nonesuch Press throughout its life) undoubtedly strains the definition of any form of ‘press’, let alone a private press, near enough to breaking point..."

I chuckled reading that part, because I also had a similar impression back when I first came across Centipede Press and later similar publishers that had 'press' in their names but completely outsourced the actual printing of the books. Interesting to see that it wasn't an unusual observation!

>11 grifgon: "Fine press exists largely as it did 10+ years ago."

I think the more interesting question would be where you see fine press in 10+ years. Do you think it will remain largely the same? I'm not sure I agree that fine press doesn't change. I've only been coming on this forum a year and I'm seeing change. For example, I see a style of art creeping in that would never be considered in fine press - although I could be corrected on this point by somebody who has been in fine press a long time. I don't have that scope. I'm using fine press in the broad sense too.

>22 BillWoodbridge: "the distinction between private press and artists’ books, never entirely clear-cut, has become still more blurred in the contemporary fine press world"

I still don't understand that distinction to be honest. I hear disparaging remarks about artists' books but from what I can see there doesn't seem to be a huge distinction.

>25 LT79-1: I think a new hybrid category is emerging which we can call 'Fine Publishers'.

I'd place Suntup, Conversation Tree, Curious King, Centipede etc. in this class. They are not 'presses' in the traditional sense, and they are also not major mass-market commercial publishers either. They care deeply about the craft of quality bookmaking - both the physical book as well as content presentation - but they are not rigidly tied to any traditional styles. They easily flow and blend modern styles and technology with traditional methods.

I think that's why it appears like there's a change to fine press. These modern 'presses' shouldn't have rigidly been categorized as such in the first place. We can say they are their own new thing.

>24 Ibkay: This can be a bit of a contentious debate! But it has a long history. To quote from A J A Symons, The Nonesuch Century (Nonesuch Press 1936), ‘Francis Meynell (the Nonesuch Press proprietor), who directs every detail of the production of Nonesuch books, and uses printing firms as printing tools, is as much a press-master as Morris, even if not so precisely master of a Press.’ Meynell did indeed ‘direct every detail of production’, at least in the years when he controlled the Press himself, and he went so far as to do this on a practical level with the aid of a proofing press for extensive experimentation with ideas before outsourcing the finalized designs to commercial printers. But to describe him as ‘as much a press-master as Morris’ is to overstate things to the point of defensiveness, in my opinion.

>25 LT79-1: Private Press vs Artists’ Books is even more murky than Private vs Fine, I think. It’s been said (can’t remember by whom) that an artist’s book / livre d’artiste ‘is a work of art, not a representation of a work of art’. Which sounds very neat but doesn’t really get us much further forward. What about a book of original wood engravings, printed from the blocks, issued in a small limitation? There are plenty of those about, classic and modern, that wouldn’t be described as artists’ books, even though they are works of art in the sense they’re not representations of any ‘more original’ artwork.

The closest I’ve come to pinning it down (again from the viewpoint of classic 20th century books rather than the wilder shores of more modern ‘artists’ books’) is to say that the primary purpose of the livre d’artiste is to act as a vehicle for the art therein, and all the other book design elements, despite typically exhibiting a high degree of luxury and craftsmanship, are in danger of being assembled with little regard to their relevance or balance to the whole book. Whereas private press / fine printing tends to place those priorities the other way around.

>26 Ibkay: that makes sense. But would you say there's any kind of feedback loop between these fine publishers influencing fine presses? I see more fine presses publishing scifi books for example. I'm sure somebody also mentioned on here that Suntup innovated an interesting (non traditional) material in their slipcase design which was later adopted by a fine press (can't remember which one). I'd just assume there would be influence no matter how subtle. Influence means change.

>27 BillWoodbridge: these categories do get very murky. I do find myself scratching my head sometimes. What you say makes sense to me as I've noticed some commenters talk about artists' books as though they're vanity projects. I suppose they could lose track of the book as a functioning book.

A few comments on all of the above:

1. All of this talk with regard to fine press vs. private press vs. artist's books, etc. is tedious and completely misses the point. Ultimately, the only thing that really matters is: "Do I want this book in my collection and will it give me great pleasure to hold and read it?" Everything else is noise.

2. Deciding which fine or private press books will work for you is similar to former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's definition of pornography: "I know it when I see it." Over time, you will quickly understand which books and fine/private press publishers work for you, which books you wish to acquire and collect.

3. Regardless of your collecting interests and price points, do not compromise on book condition. Buying badly flawed copies to save a few hundred dollars is false economy. Learn what the range of book condition is for each book you are considering for purchase, i.e., some famous private press books cannot be found in fine or NF condition, and buy the finest copy you can afford.

>29 dlphcoracl: You’ve written this as if you expect someone to carve it into stone tablets.

Clearly, some people regard talking about fine press vs. private press vs. artist’s books as other than tedious noise. You don’t: fine. But why not prove your point rather than proclaim it?

>29 dlphcoracl: "Do I want this book in my collection and will it give me great pleasure to hold and read it?"

How do you come to that conclusion in the first place? Hopefully not by unconsciously grasping but through a process of critical thinking, categorizing, comparing, etc. In fact you are one of the best contributers on this forum at this critical kind of thinking. The books I enjoyed 10 years ago are totally different to the ones I collect today through comparison and honing definitions and verbalising unconscious thought processes.

In short I enjoy the background 'noise'.

>18 Glacierman: Beautifully put, mate.

I came to fine press from a heterogeneous route - a combination of interest in archaic documents plus encountering certain fine press works along the way, leavened with a dash of doing some letterpress at a local art center. I'm a wide-ranging collector and pick up a lot of stuff that's off the radar of the more traditional fine press collectors. Plus I've got a large collection of chapbooks, which are often considered a gateway drug for fine press but some regard as lesser works.

I consider livres d'artistes as distinct from fine press, as those can be manufactured in a wide variety of ways, some of which would fall out of most people's definitions of fine presswork. The intent of such books is different as well. But ultimately I find value in all three categories - fine press, private press, livre d'artist - and appreciate each for the intentions behind them.

And this is all before one dives into the treacherous waters of what being a "publisher" means!

>29 dlphcoracl: “Ultimately, the only thing that really matters is: "Do I want this book in my collection and will it give me great pleasure to hold and read it?" Everything else is noise.”

Thanks for describing my book collecting strategy so clearly, although I have never stated it so succinctly. I enjoy reading the philosophies of other collectors, but ultimately it comes down to whether I would enjoy owning the book.

>29 dlphcoracl:

All of this talk with regard to fine press vs. private press vs. artist's books, etc. is tedious and completely misses the point. Ultimately, the only thing that really matters is: "Do I want this book in my collection and will it give me great pleasure to hold and read it?" Everything else is noise.

But how does one discern which books will spark joy in them, and where to look?

Knowing a thing or two about how the books are made, the traditions from which they come, and their raisons d'être can be a big help.

The perennial curiosity about these categories is not about pedantics, but about finding yourself somewhere and asking, "Where am I?" Hardly an insignificant question.

>22 BillWoodbridge: "Extracted from an old essay" – Any chance you'd share the whole thing??

>29 dlphcoracl: "Do I want this book in my collection and will it give me great pleasure to hold and read it?"

Generally speaking, that is indeed the motivation collectors have, it is just that the criteria we use to make that judgment varies...a lot.

Some might be tightly focused on assembling a collection of private press books in which content and printing technology used are irrelevant, just so long as the work came from a truly private press.

Others might focus on finely printed works which they want to read or on the works of a particular author in first editions.

It all boils down to what hits your switch.

>27 BillWoodbridge: Bill – a curiosity I have on the question of Meynell being "as much a press-master as Morris".

Did Morris actually operate the press himself? Or was he the "studio boss" looking over the shoulders of the pressmen, compositors, etc and directing their work? I don't actually know the answer here, but I imagine you do.

>29 dlphcoracl:

I agree with the general feeling that debating these definitions is a little tedious, but I also think some of the (potential) key differentiators are worthwhile exploring. For example, the difference between a press outsourcing almost everything and one doing almost everything themselves by hand - I have books I love falling in both categories, but I can appreciate them in different ways.
Understanding these sorts of differences has helped me refine which books I'm really interested in.

I actually disagree about always prioritising book condition. I have bought some books in less than fine condition that I love just as they are (I wouldn't even trade for a fine copy). I also get a certain sentimental satisfaction from giving a loving home to an old book with 'character '.

>37 grifgon: Morris did not print, whereas Meynell actually did.

>38 EdmundRodriguez: Recently, I've purchased The Book of Job, excellently printed on finely crafted paper at the Chiswick Press for S. Wellwood in the year 1907. This is the 1st ed. with the notable introduction by G.K. Chesterton.

The soft-leather binding is partially worm-eaten along the spine and the fore of the front cover. The embossed rectangle with the gilt title & device is unharmed. Inside, the block including the endpapers is fine.

Except for the aforementioned worm traces the book is near fine, in broken, but whole original box. It cost me £7.

I'd say, if Job, he should come worm-eaten. If it's also gratis, better so! Very happy with the purchase!

>40 Transfixed: wonderful comment. I have the same edition, in slightly better state, but perhaps some books really do benefit from a tasteful degree of decay.

>40 Transfixed: Good deal! Moving a bit off-topic, however.

>35 grifgon: Thanks for the interest! Overall the essay is concerned with personal collecting strategies - this ramble is one of the few sections that's more general and fit for extracting and sharing. Within it however there are short (~ 500 word) summaries of various (classic) Presses - I could share some of those if there was any interest?

Spoiler alert: they're quite opinionated, and probably have more than a few factual errors.

>37 grifgon: I can't claim any special knowledge beyond what I've read in Peterson (The Kelmscott Press, Clarendon Press 1991) and Sparling (The Kelmscott Press and William Morris, Master-Craftsman, Macmillan 1924), but I think the latter (ie 'studio boss') is the answer, as ChestnutPress points out. W H Bowden, the son of Morris's first compositor/printer, quoted by Peterson p101: 'When the type came in from the founders, he (Morris) was very anxious to help lay it in the cases, but not having served his time to the business, more often than not put the type into the wrong box. It was very amusing to hear him saying to himself "There, bother it, in the wrong box again!" But he was perfectly good-humoured, and presently ran off and came back ... without a hat, and with a bottle of wine under each arm, with which to drink the health of the Kelmscott Press'. After that experience it seems Bowden didn't let him loose on the press itself: '... on the last day of the month (ie 31 January 1891) the elder Bowden (ie W H Bowden's father) printed for Morris several versions of a trial page of The Story of the Glittering Plain'

So although it seems almost heretical to suggest it, it seems that the 'Master-Craftsman' (Sparling's hagiographical term) didn't literally operate his press even at its inception. I have a suspicion though that Morris's colourful character would have uttered something rather stronger than 'bother it' when faced with adversities with the type.

>43 BillWoodbridge: Thank you Bill. That's terrific. Maybe better to call Morris a "Master-Craftsmanager"!

>44 grifgon: Morris was more of a designer, really, and he turned his hand to the design of many things, not just books.

>34 jroger1: I also agree with this sentiment and try to always stay as true to it as possible when adding books to my collection.

I have a few truly impressive fine or “private” press books that many would consider among the pinnacle of handmade book craft.

I also own books from genre publishers that, while well constructed (sewn binding, acid free paper, etc), are clearly machine made and printed offset, but are highly valuable in different ways; perhaps signed by the author, a first edition, iconic artwork, etc.

While vastly different, both the private press books and the machine made genre books bring me joy in equal measure, and I truly would not be able to select a favorite among them. While some who prefer a more cohesive collection would perhaps find mine too eclectic, the great variety is something I really value personally.

>47 rogerthat2: Personally I feel that every genre of literature, including science fiction and fantasy, covers a gamut of relevance and maturity. Just as food comes in a range from ultra-processed junk food to three-Michelin-star fine cuisine. I suspect what you are turned off by is the escapist stuff, much of which is indeed formulaic pap designed to scratch the same itch over and over. You'll find the like in other genres as well, including romance and mystery.

Non-fiction is great and can be inspiring, but well-written fiction is about the possible, and it is intended to broaden our minds to things outside our experience. Of course the worst of it does the opposite, plugging us into a hollow dream of wish-fulfillment and simplified tropes. But again, this isn't a defining characteristic of fantasy and sci-fi, just something that is much more obvious when it occurs within these kinds of writings.

I think lumping authors like Wells, Verne, Kafka, Calvino, Le Guin, Ballard, Tolkien, and other fantasists into the same bucket as execrable genre fiction is a mistake, and I suspect you are railing again the worst excesses of the literature, hopefully not against these categories as a whole. Whatever the case, however, I don't think your opinions deserve flagging, even if you do intend them to be all-encompassing. Each to their own.

>47 rogerthat2: Certainly some, maybe most, SF and fantasy is "really cringe." (Ted Sturgeon, SF writer, once declared that "90% of everything is crap"). But to drop it all into the volcano is to miss out on stunning works by Homer, Keats, Shakespeare, Henry James, Borges, Gene Wolfe, John M. Ford, and others. And it's to miss out on a lot of pleasure.

But you've mentioned that you collect works of importance for education, so maybe pleasure doesn't play a huge role in your reading. To each his own. As for me, I'm having a blast, all while having a life and raising my children.

Guys… troll-feeding is not recommended.

>50 BorisG: I took it to be sincere. But you might be right.

>50 BorisG: Agreed. Especially when the pompous guy is also a hypocrite for bragging on the George Macy devotees page that he picked up the LEC version of The Invisible Man by HG Wells on Dec 1st. A fellow stunted manchild! 😉

Other than that, this has been a very illuminating conversation. While I've collected fine press and other high quality press books for many years, I've only just waded into private press offerings, so I'm getting quite an education here.

>50 BorisG: Sorry, I tend not to engage with trolls and agree that it's a wise stratagem. Wasn't aware this was such an instance, otherwise I would have forborne. Still, I stand by my points. 😊

>13 wcarter: This was precisely my path. Now I’m wedged in the rabbit hole like Pooh.

>50 BorisG: +) I couldn't tell if it was a poor attempt at trolling or good old-fashioned sarcasm. Either way, it made me laugh!

I don't know, guys. Was rogerthat2's message so egregious that it deserved flagging? I've been called much worse than a manchild with no life, and a (perverse?) part of me appreciates the chance for a back-and-forth, if for no other reason than to help me clarify to myself what it is I think.

>56 Shotcaller: Kind of reminded me of Shatner's SNL appearance in the "Get A Life" Trek convention skit. ^_^

There is a place for a *small amount* of Sci-Fi, I'd agree that it can be stimulating.

>57 Shadekeep: Exactly. I thought it was funny. Absurd, but amusing. Maybe it was Shatner popping in.

Wow, I am at awe at the responses and the discussions my silly question prompted. Rest assured I have read every post and I have the utmost respect for all of you who took the time to write thoughtful, educational and well-researched answers. I have been, as @rogerthat2 requested, "getting a life" and have thus been very busy with my two young daughters. Even though my reading habits might not be saving the world I highly enjoy reading my stories about rocketships and wizards. I've always had the opinion that it doesn't matter what you read, only that you read. There are too many people, especially younger people, who don't read and never read, and it's such a shame because reading is a blast.

This topic broadend my mind when it comes to collecting books and deepend my appreciation for properly handmade books. I hope to one day own books from the likes of No Reply Press and The Last Press, who produce some absolutely fantastic stuff. I am especially interested in (look away @rogerthat2) NPRs science fiction trilogy! There are so many presses mentioned, both here and on this forum at large, and I am constantly impressed by the quality of books made, both now and decades ago.

I am happy that science fiction and fantasy can add to the smorgasgord that is fine/private press. In my mind the most important part, whether it be a "fine publisher", fine press or private press, is that books are made well, with thought and care, and that people appreciate how and why. I find it profoundly sad that the "masters" within this community are getting older and knowledge and equipment might dissapear in time. Especially in Norway, and locally in my town, where I have talked to retired pressers and typers and bookbinders who express such joy when I show an interest in their craft. It makes me so happy to know there are people out there who are continuing this art, and if people like Anthony from Curious King, Tony from Conversation Tree Press, Rich from Lyra's, and all the others I don't know of can pull in more people to this amazing community, then I say bring it on, cringey science fiction and all.

>60 7om: " I've always had the opinion that it doesn't matter what you read, only that you read."

Laughable.

In the past, fine press publishers have been mainly focused on the canon of important literature for our atrophying civilization, and questionable poetry. Now it is catering to intellectual dwarfs who just want to read some easy childish stuff for "enjoyment", whatever makes them "happy"with the least amount of effort.

And yes such people can raise children, who will hopefully excel their parents. Better to have children in poorer conditions than none at all.

>61 rogerthat2: Goddamn, I hope the kids excel enough in terms of grammar not to write "excel their parents." I now understand your hunger to educate yourself.

>62 Shotcaller: My word did I enjoy that.

>61 rogerthat2: I'll be teaching my children Akkadkan from infancy so that they don't end up being dorks.

>63 FitzJames: I live to serve!

>64 grifgon: hah! And the world will be richer for it!

>62 Shotcaller:

>61 rogerthat2: Oh, trust me, I also hope my girls way excel their dad. Should a parent not wish that for their children?

>68 7om: For very strong parents it's not realistic to hope for that, we just hope that our children turn out as well as us and capable of carrying on the baton.

Sitting around reading Sci-Fi and "hoping" the best for your children isn't a great strategy. If you want them to get educated, read something intelligent yourself and educate them.

I excelled my parents. Only by graphing them out in a spreadsheet did I manage to figure out how each contributed to the wo/manchild I am today.

>56 Shotcaller: I agree, no reason to flag an opinion. It’s no different than the censorship I’m sure most here would abhor. Have a laugh and scroll on if you don’t like it.

Not to overstate the obvious, but it seems that many human activities can be used for pleasure, education, advancement, community building, (and harm, destruction, etc.). Though I am not sure I align with all the verve of the debate, I see how some value reading so--and perhaps fear the state of our world so--that they want to reserve it for civilization building endeavors--

and I see how others see reading as a way to investigate the world to learn more--

and I see how others see reading to escape the world...

but I am just thankful Griffin, Chad, and others press what they and others write into pages that end up in our world!

>37 grifgon: There is next to no chance that Morris operated the press. Certainly, nothing from Kelmscott that I'm aware of was the product of his hand work. Brilliant designer and book artist, but one with clean hands!