Moral issues on signed copies

Well... look at it this way; people who have that sort of attitude generally sell it for a profit, when possible. And no few times, the people they sell them to will read them. Other times, when they take a loss, then they sell them just to get space for things they think will be more valuable. And then people who buy them will read them. Even if it's centuries down the line....

But it'd be a darned sight better for the books to be read, in my opinion, even if (like me) you do take very good care of them, keep them in plastic when you're not reading 'em, etc. (I'm not fanatical, but I do have a lot of older books, and if I take care of them this way, there's less wear and tear, and I can read them as often as I choose, without doing any damage to speak of... I've got paperbacks from the 1930s and 1940s that I've read several times, that look as good as the day I bought 'em ... but I still got the pleasure of reading 'em whenever I had a mind....
 
Okay... gotta step in here and defend book collectors... especially collectors of OLD books (as opposed to new books bought for investment... though this does apply, I guess, to book collectors in general).

First, let me just say that I don't believe in collecting for investment. I think it's a losing proposition unless you're collecting high-end items like art or furniture, or certain TYPES of books, etc. But the value of pop cultural items -- toys, beanie babies, comic books, science fiction and fantasy books -- relies too much on public whim, and the maket is just too volatile. I always tell people, if you collect strictly for investment, you're better off just buying stocks. Collect because you love the thing you're collecting! So I collect books for other reasons...

It's true, books are meant to be read. No doubt about it. The stories are why the book exists in the first place. But that doesn't mean that books can't be appreciated as objects, too. For me, and many book collectors, old books represent a direct, physical link to the past. To a time when the book was first published, and the various cultural elements that inspired that book. But old books are a finite resource... if one is wrecked, that direct, physical link to the past is broken forever. (If nothing else, we lose that great, vintage, science fiction cover art!) For those of us who care about such things, THAT'S a waste and a tragedy. Which is why we buy reading copies, too. This way, we can collect and preserve these pieces of history while still enjoying the stories.

I think it's unfair to assume that all book collectors stick their collections in boxes, which are sealed in vaults, which are then buried 500 feet beneath the earth. I've NEVER met a book collector who doesn't take pride in DISPLAYING his or her collection. (DEALERS, on the other hand, are a different story...) Sure, most of us take care to protect the books by putting them in plastic or whatever. But again, that's because we'd rather see these books survive. The story isn't going anywhere -- it remains in print, and MANY book collectors buy modern editions so they can read them. (Or, again, reading copies that are already beaten up.)

Remember, museums exist not to hide stuff away, but to allow others to see those things in the collections, while at the same time keeping those things safe. Many book collectors feel the same way -- protect old books for the future enjoyment, or education, or whatever of other people. That's why, when they eventually decide to leave the world of collecting, many collectors try to sell their books not to dealers -- the easiest way to dispose of a collection -- but to other collectors, people who will enjoy the books they way the original (well, sort of original) owners did. OR, many book collectors donate the collections to libraries or schools, with the stipulation that people have ACCESS to the books, and that they not simply end up in some dark basement.

I actually think that to suggest an old book isn't worth protecting, that it should be read until its pages fall out and its covers succumb to endless creasing, is sort of insulting to the book. I'm proud to think that there are people out there who consider science fiction books worth preserving in the same way that people consider Shakespeare's folios worth preserving. To me, this indicates how important science fiction itself has become (or fantasy, or weird tales, or whatever).

Consider:
If you dig up a bowl from ancient Egypt or wherever, are you really going to eat out of it? Scraping forks and spoons against it, washing it with eroding water and soap?

Earlier, someone compared books to a painting, saying that they wouldn't stick the art in a closet. True, but you would take care to protect your art, by framing it properly and displaying it in a way that allows you to view it but also keeps the dog from slobbering all over it.

Vintage car buffs love to drive their cars, but they also know that driving them every day, in the same manner they drive their Hondas, would end up harming the car, causing it no end of wear and tear. This would shorten the car's lifespan, and would prevent the car buff from driving it in the future. So they drive it only on weekends, and the rest of the time they keep it under a cloth in their garage.

So I think there's more to book collecting than most people here seem to think. It's not the black and white (I think there's a bad pun in there) pasttime that everyone assumes. Rather, it's a fun way to connect with books as important cultural objects, objects that changed the way our society works, and ultimately bring pleasure to people on a daily basis.

ALL THAT SAID... I do believe, as I said earlier, that books should be read -- especially hardcover books (new or old), as they're pretty darn durable and, even if you're collecting them, you don't really have to worry. Signed, unsigned, whatever -- read the darn book! Or, buy two -- the author will probably thank you for it. ;)

(I wrote about some of the other benefits of book collecting in another thread, I won't bother including those, too -- no one wants to read any more of my ramblings!)
 
If you want to invest, get a mutual fund. If it's not able to be read, it isn't a book. It's just a pretty object. Ultimately the goal of a book is to be read, just as the goal of a toy is to be played with.

Kudos to you if you can keep a book in pristine condition without getting hand cramps or getting annoyed. I gave up on keeping my books nice a long time ago- in fact I prefer them a little ratty so I don't have to worry about it.

I've NEVER met a book collector who doesn't take pride in DISPLAYING his or her collection.
I live with one. She's always convinced she doesn't have the money to display them (not to mention the room), so they sit in boxes, and sometimes something happens to the box (hey, it's life!), and then they're all ruined anyway. Paperbacks in particular are not good to collect- they are meant to be cheap! The collector mentality can work all sorts of trouble if it isn't kept in proper balance and perspective.
 
Kudos to you if you can keep a book in pristine condition without getting hand cramps or getting annoyed. I gave up on keeping my books nice a long time ago- in fact I prefer them a little ratty so I don't have to worry about it.

See, that's the odd thing about it. Perhaps it's because, when I was very young and first began reading, I couldn't afford to get books very often, so I had only a few, and took very good care of them, but enjoyed reading and re-reading them, and learned how to hold them (including paperbacks, which is what most of my then-collection were) without any inconvenience, cramps, etc. As a result, I've got lots of books I've had since I was a kid that are in darned-near as good condition now as when I first got them, save for the gradual browning of some of the interiors. I don't think it's deserving of kudos... to me, it's just not difficult, nor inconvenient; but neither do I have to do without reading them whenever I've a mind to.
 
I once went to the Land of Unread Books; 'twas very sad.
 
Personally, I don't see any moral issues involved in book collecting. If a person buys a book, they have as much right to stash it away on a shelf or hide it away in a box, as another person has to spill coffee all over it or dogear the pages.

I think Somebloke's housemate was way out of line yelling at him because he chose to read a signed copy while cooking, and as I said before, if it was a book I had written my own preference would be that somebody would read it sooner or later. And heaven knows the books in my own house tend to lead an adventurous life, poor things, and often have the scars to prove it. But why shouldn't other people be able to collect books the same way they collect anything else and treat them as untouchable artifacts if that's what they want to do?

It's a lot better than people who turn books into lamps and tables, which I've seen designers do on television. That does raise my hackles a bit. Especially because they use old books to do this, and some rare gem may be rendered unreadable (or uncollectable) because of it.
 
It's when people hunt books, without any intention of eating them that annoys me. Then you find them stuffed in their lodges high up in the mountains.
 
It's when people hunt books, without any intention of eating them that annoys me. Then you find them stuffed in their lodges high up in the mountains.

Gosh, yes. And when they kill the first book in a multi-part series out of season and leave all the baby books still in manuscript to starve in the wilderness. It takes a particularly heartless individual to do that.
 
I'd like to see them left alone overnight in a room full of books, (maybe even a library), and see if they can survive without their rifle.

The next morning they'd be mewling like a truffle.
 
Gosh, yes. And when they kill the first book in a multi-part series out of season and leave all the baby books still in manuscript to starve in the wilderness. It takes a particularly heartless individual to do that.

Yes, you should only take out the barren females and non-breeding males at that time of year!:p

Surely the best plan is to get another, beat-up, or less pristine at least, copy of any book of which you have a signed or first edition copy? Then you can read that while cooking, or eating spaghetti and sauce, or whatever, while the valuble edition stays safely on the shelf.
 
I think Somebloke's housemate was way out of line yelling at him because he chose to read a signed copy while cooking, and as I said before, if it was a book I had written my own preference would be that somebody would read it sooner or later. And heaven knows the books in my own house tend to lead an adventurous life, poor things, and often have the scars to prove it. But why shouldn't other people be able to collect books the same way they collect anything else and treat them as untouchable artifacts if that's what they want to do?
Homemade spagetti stains are a sign of love of literature...
 
To attempt to drag the topic back towards... somewhere;)

I own a signed slipcase hardcover of David Gemmell's "Troy". I got given this as a present, but not being the world's biggest Gemmell fan, I have no particular desire to read it. Now, I imagine it's worth a little bit (I dunno, £30/40?) because it's a signed edition. Considering the recent demise of the author, it might even fetch a bit more. I think that selling it on eBay or something, with the knowledge of his recent death, would make me feel rather bad. Should it?
 
Would you only be doing it because he died, or would you be doing it because that's what you would have done, regardless? If the first, then some might question your morals. But then, all that matters is how you feel...
 
When I first saw the title of this thread, for some reason it made me think you'd gotten an autograph, and the author had signed it with some disagreeable political opinions on it or something.;)

If it's not a book you want, you might as well get some money for it and send it on its merry way to someone who does want it. However, if you feel you should wait longer out of respect for the author's death, then do so. Better to lose a little money than to feel bad about it for the rest of your life.:)
 
Surely the best plan is to get another, beat-up, or less pristine at least, copy of any book of which you have a signed or first edition copy? Then you can read that while cooking, or eating spaghetti and sauce, or whatever, while the valuble edition stays safely on the shelf.

Well, Pyan, that depends... some books you're just not going to find that way; even if they don't cost much, they may be scarce. Then you've got to decide which way to go with it.
 
Well, Pyan, that depends... some books you're just not going to find that way; even if they don't cost much, they may be scarce. Then you've got to decide which way to go with it.

But if you wreck the "reading" copy, it'll improve the value of the mint one, by increasing its rarity!:D

No, I see what you mean. But a lot of SF/F books are available for very little money in charity shops and ebay, etc. Obviously, if you can't find another copy, you should be careful with the one you've got.

Incidentally, I hear that a first edition of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 makes a great pair of oven gloves.........:D
 

Similar threads


Back
Top