12 Feb, 2021
(edited)Edited by Kaboka on 2021-2-13 5:36:47 PM UTC
Edited by Trotter on 2021-2-13 6:38:25 PM UTC
2021-2-12 11:45:51 PM UTC
Hi,
I've recently acquired a copy of this beautiful 1986 deluxe UK Unwin edition of The Hobbit. The book is in excellent condition, I don't think it's ever been read. However, I discovered something rather unusual: one of the illustrations on page 62 is upside down. It must be a rare binding error. The rest of the illustrations and pages are fine or at least I haven't found any other flaws yet. Does this effect the value of the book in any way? I know there are always some printing or binding errors which could increase the value of some books or the opposite.
I would really appreciate some advice, thank you.
12 Feb, 2021
2021-2-12 11:57:38 PM UTC
Kaboka wrote:
Hi,
I've recently acquired a copy of this beautiful 1986 deluxe UK Unwin edition of the Lord of The Rings. The book is in excellent condition, I don't think it's ever been read. However, I discovered something rather unusual: one of the illustrations on page 62 is upside down. It must be a rare binding error. The rest of the illustrations and pages are fine or at least I haven't found any other flaws yet. Does this effect the value of the book in any way? I know there are always some printing or binding errors which could increase the value of some books or the opposite.
I would really appreciate some advice, thank you.
Binding errors reduce the value of the book significantly (most collectors would not knowingly purchase a book so afflicted). Doesn't stop you enjoying the book, though!
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 12:00:50 AM UTC
Probably decrease value of this Hobbit.
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 2:09:51 PM UTC
We collectors are a strange lot. ?
Just because a majority of collectors won’t find this misprint appealing doesn’t mean there won’t be a few that do.
So as others have said, enjoy the book for what it is, but I’d also say don’t consider it of any lesser value then any others. IMO of course. ?
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 2:34:10 PM UTC
I find binding errors potentially (maybe I should even say "hypothetically") interesting from a bibliographical point of view. However, in light of the mass-produced nature of almost all Tolkien publications, this is, in reality, a bit of a naive view. Most bibliographers would find little actual interest in a plate being machine-bound upsidedown in a book like this. In some cases it may also result in the book being structurally unsound too.
So, interesting? Yes, kind of. Collectable? I don't really think so. Worth more money even from a quirky perspective? Judging by most of the comments by collectors on here, nope.
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 3:15:44 PM UTC
I have a couple of books with binding errors.
A copy of ROTK and another of the Hobbit. Both are from the 90's. In both books some pages are printed upside down like this one and I got my money back for both as the seller failed to disclose these details. But the longer I have them the more I like them, one of the more interesting aspects to my collection I guess...I don't know, I'm conflicted!
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 4:22:44 PM UTC
Khamûl wrote:
I find binding errors potentially (maybe I should even say "hypothetically") interesting from a bibliographical point of view. However, in light of the mass-produced nature of almost all Tolkien publications, this is, in reality, a bit of a naive view. Most bibliographers would find little actual interest in a plate being machine-bound upsidedown in a book like this. In some cases it may also result in the book being structurally unsound too.
So, interesting? Yes, kind of. Collectable? I don't really think so. Worth more money even from a quirky perspective? Judging by most of the comments by collectors on here, nope.
I think that captures the crux of it.
I would add that binding errors are not part of an authors intent so while they may seem interesting to a few people I personally have no interest in them. I want what was intended, not something resulting from an error. Unless it be a unpublished text accidentally printed in the first batch. Then I'd pounce on it.
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 4:56:50 PM UTC
That's some binding error, as that's
The Hobbit and not
The Lord of the Rings!
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 5:35:38 PM UTC
My bad, sorry! It is The Hobbit 1986 Deluxe edition, not The Lord of the Rings, I made a mistake in my description, which I've corrected :)
13 Feb, 2021
2021-2-13 9:28:05 PM UTC
No worries at all! Just being funny, mistakes/typos happen all too often (trust me, I know, as I often need to edit some posts guilty of that)
16
3030