Completist vs collector discussion

insurrbution wrote:

The term completist here, is misused I've been noticing.

A completist implies finishing a collection in a particular style. Example: "I don't own Unfinished Tales yet."

Double-dipping implies you already own the title, yet in a different format, and you intend on getting another: "I already own Unfinished Tales, but look! Illustrations!"

The two uses above aren't the same thing.

I have to disagree. The term 'completist' refer to someone who indiscriminately and obsessively collects up, in this case, books. You are referring to that as double-dipping. A completist is not looking to collect a certain range or style. That is a collector. A collector discriminates and chooses what to collect. A completist goes after anything and everything.

Not really. A completist could be someone who wants to own every available edition of a book, or very book released by an author, in every possible edition etc.

Or what onthetrail said... I’d also add that a collector is usually more discerning than a completist.

insurrbution wrote:

The term completist here, is misused I've been noticing.

A completist implies finishing a collection in a particular style. Example: "I don't own Unfinished Tales yet."

Would like to know why you think this definition is correct and your sources and also why we are misusing the term on this site?

I don't think anyone here (or anywhere, that I am aware of) is a Tolkien "completist". Wayne and Christina made a stab at it (separately, then together when they married) for many decades, but I seem to recall they have pared back on some areas of their collecting due to sheer volume of new material coming out (mostly books about Tolkien, and perhaps translations, if I remember correctly).

There are amazing collections put together that focus on a particular subset of Tolkienalia - Sumner Hunnewell with fanzines, Trotter or Stu for Hobbit impressions, Khamûl for Silmarillion variants, etc. etc.

As far as collecting a single copy of each Tolkien's fictional works (for reading, one would assume) they are all in print, so that could be accomplished with an industrious afternoon's work if one had a reasonable budget to spend. The regulars on this site are a little more.... involved than that. ?

If you are interested in delving quite deeply into Wayne and Christina's collection and thoughts about it, spend an afternoon (or many) delving through their book collecting posts on their blog.

onthetrail wrote:

insurrbution wrote:

The term completist here, is misused I've been noticing.

A completist implies finishing a collection in a particular style. Example: "I don't own Unfinished Tales yet."

Double-dipping implies you already own the title, yet in a different format, and you intend on getting another: "I already own Unfinished Tales, but look! Illustrations!"

The two uses above aren't the same thing.

I have to disagree. The term 'completist' refer to someone who indiscriminately and obsessively collects up, in this case, books. You are referring to that as double-dipping. A completist is not looking to collect a certain range or style. That is a collector. A collector discriminates and chooses what to collect. A completist goes after anything and everything.

That makes sense - I stand corrected.

Completist isn't even a real word, is it? And in collecting it's entirely context driven, and defined by the person doing the collecting. For example, you wouldn't describe me as a "Tolkien completist" since I don't aim to collect all of Tolkien's work. But, even if I did, someone else might easily define "completist" as someone aiming to own every significant edition of Tolkien's work, not just his work generally (in print). They would be the ones deciding on what "significant" meant though. And again, regarding myself, I clearly enjoy buying copies of The Silmarillion. But if I were to define myself as a completist in this regard, that would need to be qualified. I personally only really collect UK editions. Does this mean I'm not a completist?

On its own the word is literally meaningless.

completist [ kuh m-plee-tist ]
noun

a person who attempts to complete a collection or set, especially a collector who wants to collect an example of every item in a particular field:
This recording is a must for obsessive Sinatra completists.
I'd only recommend this movie to Hepburn completists.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/completist

These are both new terms to me and I really don't think it matters what you call yourself. If you like to complete sets then you are a completist. However one could argue that the true sense of the meaning would be if you wanted to complete the set of all of Tolkien's writings, or if you wanted every edition ever published in say Spanish. As far as double dipping...wouldn't every collector be a double dipper?