GR 1st edition, he thinks

[Dedalus]

rosenlake at mac.com wrote:

> What is it about the first edition of a mass-marketed book that makes
> people think it's better than the copy they might have? Does one use it
> to make people think you bought it before everyone else? Is that worth
> so much money? It's probably full of typos quietly corrected in later
> editions, anyway. And what good is it if you don't use it for reading
> because it's too valuable? Weird.

I know what you mean . . . but what's better: a 1932 Packard rusting in the
junkyard, or perhaps a badly worn and warped 1954 Fender Precision Bass ---
or these same objects in cherry condition?  First editions are nice for
bragging rights, display purposes, and on rare occasion some money.
Collecting first editions is for the bibliophile the natural progression
from a childhood of collecting dolls or Hot Wheels, a youth spent in
collecting albums or posters, or an adulthood spent collecting stamps, beer
cans, or rejection slips.  True, first editions may have a fair share of
typos and such, but that adds to the charm of collecting . . . having that
first paperback edition of Toni Morrison's _Beloved_ in which the final 50
or so pages were printed upside down . . . or that early edition of
_Moby-Dick_ with a different Queequeg "mark" in Chpt. 18.

Yes, the attraction of first editions is irrational.  Like most of what we
do as a species.  Freud would undoubtedly have a curious take on it.

Ded