My take on it is that Americans really embraced the mass-market book, and that quality of construction or design was never that important, whereas the Commonwealth countries - for whatever reason - put more emphasis on well made and styled books, so we just have a bit of a historical legacy which makes the British stuff a bit more appealing for some.

I've also noticed that American style can be quite gaudy (e.g. Easton press, which takes tacky to extremes), whereas that hasn't really been a "thing" in the UK for a long time. I guess it was maybe the Americans trying to emulate the gaudy styles of European royalty. The better quality (in constructiuon) American books tend to be very tacky because they are pretending to be something they are not.

We simply have different histories and it has shaped the products we like. I must admit, I do like the American first impressions of HoME, and I have a set (albeit I have only a couple of other American editions).

There is definitely an “American” side of me that blanches at the omnibus and thrills at the cheap, thin paperback that one can almost literally devour. I can’t help but love the Barbara Remington LotR paperbacks, because they scream “read me” like nothing else (the John Howe BoLT paperbacks come close).

As for tacky faux deluxe books (the red leatherette LotR, etc.), they are essentially props. You are meant to imagine they are what Bilbo’s Red Book of Westmarch, with Translations from the Elvish, might really have been like. It’s all part of the fantasy. Some of your British editions which are self-consciously deluxe and expensive without serving up anything feeling particularly fantastic or medieval might seem to us to miss the point.

Ulmo wrote:
Some of your British editions which are self-consciously deluxe and expensive without serving up anything feeling particularly fantastic or medieval might seem to us to miss the point.

Don't worry, I think even we think they miss the point. Personally, I'm only really interested in collecting "standard" editions of books, although there was a time that collecting "deluxe" editions was of interest. Now everything has an (allegedly) deluxe edition, it seems a bit silly. More so, when the work is bottom-of-the-barrel stuff.

Ulmo wrote:
For HoMe, Sil, UT, the American first editions are all really nice.

Ulmo wrote:
I can’t help but love the Barbara Remington LotR paperbacks.

Goes back to what I said before: it is all a matter of personal taste and you should collect what makes you happy. Personally, I find things made for the European market more appealing; I guess this extends to books.

Regarding Sil and UT, I find UK first prints to be classy and elegant while also matching the spirit of the book. USA first editions use "more exciting" colors and images as if trying too hard to stand out, and they just don't work for me. In my opinion Barbara Remington's covers take this approach to an exponential level.

Relevant read (The Professor's opinion on Barbara Remington's illustrations for The Hobbit): http://stuartbuck.blogspot.com/2004/12/another-tolkien-letter.html

Morinehtar wrote:
Goes back to what I said before: it is all a matter of personal taste and you should collect what makes you happy.

I think that's the key. And there is every likelihood that what you will want to collect will change over time, anyway. It certainly has for me. Personally, the process of collecting was far more fun than the result (it isn't like I really ever look at most of my collection. How many copies of The Hobbit can you really read?), and I suspect that is not uncommon.

For me, playing with graphics and dustjackets and facsimile Songs for the Philologists, etc, is what has kept it interesting.

Great points, all. Thanks again.