Showing posts with label L.C. Page & Co.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label L.C. Page & Co.. Show all posts

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Publisher's series bindings




These beauties are getting cataloged today! As you can see from the image, they have the same binding designs just with different colors and different images in the frames. I love when bindings like these come across my desk for a couple of reasons. (1) Creating the binding description is less time consuming because you just have to switch out a few details, and (2) I just like to see how many times a series binding can be used on different books. We have several of this particular series binding in CONTENTdm but we like to scan variant bindings of the titles to see the different ways they were issued at the time.

Here are other titles that have the same binding design* as the ones I am cataloging:

Famous beauties in art
Beautiful women in art
Famous authors (women)

Music in art
Famous beauties in art
Famous actors of the day
Famous stars of light opera
The prisoner of mademoiselle
The prisoner of mademoiselle


















Amy Sacker designed this particular binding for L.C. Page & Company. The oldest version UNCG holds dates back to 1899 (Famous actors of the day) and continues at least through 1910 (The lovers' treasury of verse). Her innovative styles were relevant for years which is an accomplishment not many designers can claim. To learn more about Amy Sacker you can read all about her on Mark Schumacher's site.

What was most surprising to me about this particular series was how little it changed over that time. Sometimes when publishers reused bindings they would slowly start stripping away the frills in order to produce them more cheaply. This is especially true for the same title being reprinted over the years. The first printing would be beautiful, with illustrations and gilt and anything else you can think of. The next printing might replace the gilt with black, still nice, but a little bit cheaper. Then the next installment would take away an illustration or piece of garland (or a binding signature) and so on and so on until there was just the title left on the book. In this case, the cover of the binding stayed the same except for color variations and paper onlays that were switched out to match the subject of the binding. The Prisoner of Mademoiselle, which was published in 1904 (right in the middle of the years during which the cover design was used) had the most differences. The paper onlay didn't use an illustration or photograph; instead it had a woman's silhouette.  The spine had an additional ornamental design and lettering that were not on earlier or later versions of the binding design. This particular version of the binding was also used on the Grosset & Dunlap printing of The Prisoner of Mademoiselle, except that the silhouette was stamped on the cloth rather than an onlay. It wasn't uncommon for publishers to sell the rights for books or make accommodations (in the publisher's favor of course) with other companies which included the illustrations and book designs.

The bindings weren't the only thing that carried over from book to book, the endpapers and title page designs were also reused in some instances. Most of the books (with the exception of a few such as The Prisoner of Mademoiselle) had the series endpapers that can be seen on the left.  The three prominent visuals in red are two opened books towards the bottom and the Page printer's mark with the Latin motto "spe labor levis" which can be translated as "May the work be light" or "Hope lightens labor" or "The hope of light labor."  The visuals in red are surrounded by a green garland and floral designs with a crown at the foot of the page.

The title page (seen on the right) takes elements from the endpapers and uses them in a decorative border. What I find most fascinating about this is that while the endpapers lack a signature identifying who created the design, the initials H.B.A. can be seen in the lower right hand corner of the title page border. Who H.B.A. is I can't say. My first thought was Helen Armstrong, Margaret Armstrong's sister, but her full name was Helen Maitland Armstrong so that ruled her out immediately. Looking at L.C. Page & Company's records might provide insight as to who H.B.A. could be but I'm not sure who holds their correspondence/archives, so that will have to be left for another day when there is time to do more research on H.B.A.








Why do publishers, in this case L.C. Page & Company, reuse binding designs and illustrations on several books? The number one answer that I can come up with is that it's the most cost-effective way to produce books, so a business strategy. If you already have the plates to print the books and a beautiful cover that you commissioned, you might as well get your money's worth out of them. It's similar to what we do with recycling the metadata. We create it in our cataloging records but then it is recycled and reused in CONTENTdm. It makes life easier and doesn't take up as much time which in turns saves money.

These particular bindings weren't the only series bindings for which Amy Sacker was responsible, or that Page would put out, but that is a subject for another post at another time.

*Binding images taken from UNCG's CONTENTdm American Publishers Trade Bindings Collection

Monday, November 17, 2014

L.C. Page & Company

Penelope in California by Dorothea Castelhun came across my desk the other day with a L.C. Page & Company imprint. No big deal, until I saw the copyright and first impression date of 1926. I knew that L.C. Page & Company had changed their name to Page Company in 1914, so what's the deal? I did some research and after about a day of looking in different places, I finally have a clear somewhat clear L.C. Page & Company timeline! For those of you who do authority work and work with books with no dates, you know how important a company timeline can be. A simple publisher's name can give you a really good (and sometimes not so good) date range.

           1897- Joseph Knight Co. is renamed L.C. Page & Company when Louis Coues Page took over the company. The company was housed in the Estes Building, 212 Summer Street, Boston ("L.C. Page & Co. Publisher's Weekly 1520 (Mar 16, 1901); 762).

1901- February 1, 1901 moved locations to the New England Building at 200 Summer Street, Boston ("L.C. Page & Co. Publisher's Weekly 1520 (Mar 16, 1901); 762).

1914- End of January, first of February L.C. Page & Company change their name to Page Company with no change in management of ownership ("Books and Authors." Living Age 31 Jan. 1914; Mills, William H., and Robert Luce. Writer Jan. 1914).

1914- Three months after the company changed their name, the firm took over all of Dana Estes & Co. except for the H.M. Caldwell Company subsidiary, which went to the Dodge Publishing Company. By this time they were at the 53 Beacon Street location. The New York Times reported the the Dana Estes & Co. premises at 208 Summer Street and the workers would be kept. This wasn't really an odd acquisition. Dana Estes was actually Lewis Coues and George's stepfather. He had married their mother in 1884 (Mills, William H., and Robert Luce. Writer Apr. 1914; "Absorbs Dana Estes & Co." New York Times 29 Mar. 1914: S5; Tebbel, John. A history of book publishing in the United States. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1975. 400, 402.). 

Link to blurbs in The Writer



1923- **This was the information that took me a while to find. I finally found it in the New York Times.** The New York Times reported in the May 20, 1923 issue that the Page Company reverted back to it's original name of L.C. Page & Co. and that Louis C. Page was still president ("Books and Authors" New York Times 20 May 1923: BR12.).

1957- The New York Times reported on August 11, 1957 that the L.C. Page Company (missing the ampersand--does this mean it changed names again? I haven't found anything to back this up. Might just be a error of omission?)  was acquired by Farrar, Straus & Cudahy, Inc.but that they would continue to publish books under the Page imprint ("L.C. Page Changes Hands" New York Times 11 Aug. 1957.).


I was pretty excited when I found the 1923 piece of the puzzle since that tied everything together. If anyone knows if L.C. Page & Company decided to change their name again to just L.C. Page Company, or if you find a copy with that particular imprint, let us know!