The Enid Blyton Society

I might have to see if the library has one of those editions then. I just love a good moan about updates!

Don't forget, though, that these particular updates have, as Rob put it on the other thread, been "consigned to the dustbin of history". The current "classic" text is still significantly edited, as you know, but at least it's nevertheless largely recognisable as Enid!!

True but they still had the audacity to make those changes in the first place. And I can still have a good moan about it

My library catalogue is showing three 2010 editions:

Blackness Library - Available
Children's Centre - Onloan - Due: 12 Mar 2014
Lochee Library - Onloan - Due: 25 Mar 2014

I wonder if the borrowers consigned those editions to history and that's why they never returned them!

Fiona1986 wrote: Children's Centre - Onloan - Due: 12 Mar 2014
Lochee Library - Onloan - Due: 25 Mar 2014

I wonder if the borrowers consigned those editions to history and that's why they never returned them!

I've just been putting together a picture in a frame for someone and I've spent ages getting it all lined up square within a cardboard mount, and sticking it in place, then dusting the glass, putting it into the frame and fastening down about twenty of those metal things that hold the back of the frame in place..... only to turn it over and find a lump of fluff stuck under the glass!!!!!!!!!

Livid. I thought you were going to say it was back-to-front - I've done that before.

And the more you clean the glass, Cathy, the more static one gets.

I used to spend ages trying to clean the glass of pictures I was putting into exhibitions. It's a nightmare!

I know we've talked about this before -- but book sellers who advertise their book as 'FIRST EDITION' and then in smaller letters they put 'eighth impression'. GRRRR!!!! I know people can argue until they're blue in the face that this book is legally able to be considered a 'FIRST EDITION' - but lets be frank -- its not, is it? It's an EIGHTH EDITION because its not the first time it was printed.

There was someone selling a 'FIRST EDITION' of 'Five Go On Kirrin Island Again' the other week...except it was actually a 1950 reprint - with the dust wrapper changed so that the telescope was facing the proper way. I wrote and politely told him this couldn't be considered a 'First Edition' due to the wrapper changes, no matter how you looked at it. He was very reasonable and said he saw my point and would change his description - but he didn't.

He did this with all his books, and he replied that he did in fact describe the books as 'eighth impression' or 'tenth impression' etc further down his listing - so he considered that the 'FIRST EDITION' headline was quite acceptable.

I've seen so many 10th impression books being sold as 'FIRST EDITIONS' lately. It annoys me. If I listed my books like that, then every single original version I have could be listed as a FIRST EDITION. Maybe I'd sell more if I did that?

Maybe it's a case of these sellers having no idea what on earth they are doing. They see Enid Blyton, the pounds sign gleams in their eyes and they put first edition regardless thinking that buyers are just a bunch of brainless pratts.

And even in this case, when you confront them Rob, they couldn't really give a darn.

It's apparently a quite legitimate and accepted way of listing books, Julie. I mentioned it on here before, and a few people said it was acceptable, as the 'FIRST EDITION' refers to the fact it is the same version as the first edition - even though its an eighth impression! I personally don't get that!!

It's surprising how one can change a few words to fit into what they want then!

Carlotta King wrote:I've just been putting together a picture in a frame for someone and I've spent ages getting it all lined up square within a cardboard mount, and sticking it in place, then dusting the glass, putting it into the frame and fastening down about twenty of those metal things that hold the back of the frame in place..... only to turn it over and find a lump of fluff stuck under the glass!!!!!!!!!

Couldn't you say you've added your own artistic imprint to the work and is now a piece of conceptual art..throw a few zeros on the price tag for your services and voilà - George's cat food for a whole year for a fluff with fluff!!

Rob Houghton wrote:It's apparently a quite legitimate and accepted way of listing books, Julie. I mentioned it on here before, and a few people said it was acceptable, as the 'FIRST EDITION' refers to the fact it is the same version as the first edition - even though its an eighth impression! I personally don't get that!!

Unfortunately they are technically correct, Rob. They are only new editions if the setting of the original text is altered and a new dustwrapper does not make it a new edition. So the book that you mention above is actually a 1st edition, 8th impression. This is almost always used with adult books, although newer books tend to be listed as 1/8. Children's Book collectors tend to talk about editions always and even some of the publishers from the 50s and 60s list them as editions (1st edition, 2nd edition etc.). They are actually wrong to do so, but of course a new publisher or a new format are always new editions. Even paperbacks are still the same edition if they are internally the same, but with a change of cover - so you often see for example 'This edition 1961, reprinted 1968'.

That's all very well, technically, Tony, but when a seller lists a book as 'First Edition' and charges accordingly, then I think its actually very misleading! They force people to click on the book they are selling in order to find out its not a first edition, which I think is a bit dishonest in a way. But I accept its 'okay' to list books like this - I just wouldn't do so myself - though I'm very tempted, as about 80% of my books are 'first editions'.

Some foreign sellers started to offer their foreign books by translating them with "Google translate" or something similar.