Luckyshot wrote:
I wish Wayne G. Hammond would do a mass reprint. It would let more collectors have this work for its intended purpose and the original edition could be for those that like to collect all things to do with Tolkien. Seems like an easy sell to a print on demand shop or a Kickstarter (to avoid risk).
I would buy the Hammond Collected Shopping Lists and Receipts, and then the Deluxe Edition, let that be said loudly. But, the volume in question is 33 years old, and was out of date within months of being issued due to the nature of its topic. It is now 33 years out of date and much of what was then known can be, and has been updated and expanded on. Aside from a handful of entries almost all of them could be updated radically with new details. So while a reprint would make a lot of collectors happy, a newly updated edition is the only correct answer in my opinion. Standard and deluxe

Let's do it!onthetrail wrote:
Luckyshot wrote:
I wish Wayne G. Hammond would do a mass reprint. It would let more collectors have this work for its intended purpose and the original edition could be for those that like to collect all things to do with Tolkien. Seems like an easy sell to a print on demand shop or a Kickstarter (to avoid risk).
I would buy the Hammond Collected Shopping Lists and Receipts, and then the Deluxe Edition, let that be said loudly. But, the volume in question is 33 years old, and was out of date within months of being issued due to the nature of its topic. It is now 33 years out of date and much of what was then known can be, and has been updated and expanded on. Aside from a handful of entries almost all of them could be updated radically with new details. So while a reprint would make a lot of collectors happy, a newly updated edition is the only correct answer in my opinion. Standard and deluxe
The only proof of the Bibliography I ever saw was in loose sheets, and part of it had all of the text supposed to be in roman type set in italics, and all of the italics in roman. Whoever set the type apparently had trouble with my WordPerfect document. When I did my second book for St Paul's Bibliographies (on Arthur Ransome) I set the type myself to avoid any problems.
Nor, as far as I know, were there ever any advance review copies in wrappers, or indeed any official copies in wrappers. So the guess that this was home brewed is probably right. I'm not bothered by the copy on eBay, unless it starts to show up in multiples.
A new edition would be ideal but is really not possible at this time. As for a reprint in the meantime, although copyright in the Bibliography belongs to me, reprinting is, I believe, still up to Oak Knoll Books, the current publisher/licensee (who purchased St Paul's), who have not, if memory serves, ever formally notified me that the title is out of print.
Wayne
Nor, as far as I know, were there ever any advance review copies in wrappers, or indeed any official copies in wrappers. So the guess that this was home brewed is probably right. I'm not bothered by the copy on eBay, unless it starts to show up in multiples.
A new edition would be ideal but is really not possible at this time. As for a reprint in the meantime, although copyright in the Bibliography belongs to me, reprinting is, I believe, still up to Oak Knoll Books, the current publisher/licensee (who purchased St Paul's), who have not, if memory serves, ever formally notified me that the title is out of print.
Wayne
Findegil wrote:
The only proof of the Bibliography I ever saw was in loose sheets, and part of it had all of the text supposed to be in roman type set in italics, and all of the italics in roman. Whoever set the type apparently had trouble with my WordPerfect document. When I did my second book for St Paul's Bibliographies (on Arthur Ransome) I set the type myself to avoid any problems.
Nor, as far as I know, were there ever any advance review copies in wrappers, or indeed any official copies in wrappers. So the guess that this was home brewed is probably right. I'm not bothered by the copy on eBay, unless it starts to show up in multiples.
A new edition would be ideal but is really not possible at this time. As for a reprint in the meantime, although copyright in the Bibliography belongs to me, reprinting is, I believe, still up to Oak Knoll Books, the current publisher/licensee (who purchased St Paul's), who have not, if memory serves, ever formally notified me that the title is out of print.
Wayne
Thanks for confirming our suspisions Findegil







.webp)
18