Errata for the B&N volume

I guess, since it's already off to press. I just wish they had been able to correct it. :(



Definitely happening.


Yeah its unfortunate that they didn't make the corrections. But hey as you said, they might fix some errors in the leather-bound edition :).
 
You never cease to amaze me, M. I've just printed out this entire thread, so as to have the corrections in printed form, and to peruse the comments. I was always curious about the Del Rey editions. Do they NOT use S. T.'s texts? I remember trying to compare the mass market pd edition's "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" with that in ye Penguin edition. I had no idea the B&N edition was selling at Amazon -- yippee, now I can go there and review it! I don't see the value in a leather-bound edition if it isn't a corrected text, unless one has a fetish for ye smooth feel and tantalizing scent of leather, which I do. ;)
I am so frustrated with B&N, & yet I REALLY LOVE this edition of Lovecraft. I love S. T.'s wee notes prefacing each tale, I love that everything is there between the boards of one book. If only -- if only....
 
thanks for all the work, it's a mess.

I just read 'The Beast in the Cave' and have to admit I checked the errors just to see how bad they are.

I want to say there are two types of errors, the minor ones which make no difference (overall) such as 'and the animal' (instead of just 'the animal')

those errors don't bother me as much since the overall meaning is the same and if you didn't tell me it was supposed to be the other way, I would not know.

But you tell me there are errors where the word 'he' is used instead of 'the' that is the stuff that will drive me batty.

thanks again, I don't know if it's better I don't know half of these errors since I probably won't notice them on my own (except for when only a part of the word is there like 'he' instead of 'the').

Don't they proofread these books before printing? I guess this what to expect for $12
 
You never cease to amaze me, M.

Why, thank you, W. :D

I've just printed out this entire thread, so as to have the corrections in printed form, and to peruse the comments.

The final version (the one here is just a working copy) is in your In box now.

I was always curious about the Del Rey editions. Do they NOT use S. T.'s texts? I remember trying to compare the mass market pd edition's "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" with that in ye Penguin edition.

Good heavens -- no, they don't! "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" is an excellent example. If you check carefully, you will notice that two of the chapters start with the same line.

However, the Del Rey The Horror in the Museum and Other Revisions is obviously photographed from the Arkham House edition, so that, at least, is reliable.

I had no idea the B&N edition was selling at Amazon -- yippee, now I can go there and review it!

Only available used from sellers connected to Amazon.

I don't see the value in a leather-bound edition if it isn't a corrected text, unless one has a fetish for ye smooth feel and tantalizing scent of leather, which I do. ;)
I am so frustrated with B&N, & yet I REALLY LOVE this edition of Lovecraft. I love S. T.'s wee notes prefacing each tale, I love that everything is there between the boards of one book. If only -- if only....

If only, indeed. :(
 
Ningauble, I just wanted to express my gratitude for the heads-up about the second printing from B&N, I just placed my order last night. If it wasn't for you, I'd spent tons of money on separate editions. So hopefully it'd arrive after a week or so :D. Say, would it be possible for you to send me the list of those corrections as well? I'd like to see where the faults are.

Again *Thank you!* :D.
 
Ningauble, I just wanted to express my gratitude for the heads-up about the second printing from B&N, I just placed my order last night. If it wasn't for you, I'd spent tons of money on separate editions. So hopefully it'd arrive after a week or so :D. Say, would it be possible for you to send me the list of those corrections as well? I'd like to see where the faults are.

Again *Thank you!* :D.

You're welcome. :)

My list is a bit more reliable than my posts, since S. T. Joshi has taken a look at it and removed a couple of items that were corrections, not errors. Please PM me your e-mail address and I'll send you the list as soon as I get back from Eastercon.
 
Found another one:

534.15: Surinam. Ye Dutch Men] Surinam. Ye Dutch Men


The forum can't handle this, but the "e" in "Ye" is not supposed to be raised.
 
A few more that I found while proofing the annotated Case of Charles Dexter Ward for University of Tampa Press:

534.17: ye Bay and Book] ye Boy and Book
556.29: blind. Clearly there were a] blind. Clearly, there were a
558.20: type all of his recent] type all his recent
563.16: welle know. You can] welle knowe. You can
571.31: thickly studded in the floor] thickly studded the floor
576.8: in case of Trouble,] in Case of Trouble,


534.17 is particularly interesting. In ALL previous appearances -- including all corrected versions, from Arkham House to B&N -- this has been "ye Bay and Book", but this time Joshi has looked it up in Providence in Colonial Times (the book that was Lovecraft's primary source of historical detail for the novel), and the correct redaing is indeed "Boy and Book".

You can find Providence in Colonial Times on Internet Archive: Free Movies, Music, Books & Wayback Machine .
 
Interesting, that last... I sprang for a copy of the book about 5 years ago (though it wasn't really all that expensive, either); but I've not had a chance to go through it yet. Nice to know that this one is also available from such a source, for anyone interested in Lovecraftian research. Internet Archive, while having some problems now and again, is nonetheless such a wonderful source.....

Thank you for the continued work, Martin; and also for bringing in the piece of information dealt with above......:)
 
It's amazing there are still errors being found. Oh how I wish for a second corrected edition. Whatever happened to that, leatherbound and all?
 
It's amazing there are still errors being found. Oh how I wish for a second corrected edition. Whatever happened to that, leatherbound and all?

2011, was the last I heard. But there're no guarantees that all the errors I've found will be corrected.
 
More corrections:

276.34-35: he resented the odd] he resented that odd
281.4: down to thc shores] down to the shores
 
It's crazy that you're still finding errors in this otherwise great volume. A second fully corrected edition is so sorely needed!
 
It's crazy that you're still finding errors in this otherwise great volume. A second fully corrected edition is so sorely needed!

And I will continue to find them until I have done a complete second check of it. I found the last couple only because I was proofing The Crawling Chaos and Others for Bloodletting Press.
 
Aaaaaand yet another one:

271.9-10: should have forseen before] should have foreseen before
 
Thank you, Ningauble, really. I can understand how time consuming this must have been for you. :)

These errors are a minor nuisance, but they don't detract from overall experience, well I speak for myself though.
 
Thank you, Ningauble, really. I can understand how time consuming this must have been for you. :)

You're welcome.

These errors are a minor nuisance, but they don't detract from overall experience, well I speak for myself though.

ONE error may be a minor nuisance -- but when they add up to several per page, I go ballistic. To me, The Fiction is unreadable in its present state.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top