This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Donald A. Wollheim article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 730 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Guys, I seem to remember credible people telling me that Wollheim's thinking in the Tolkien debacle was -- he was unaware of the Houghton Mifflin editions until after the Fellowship came out. Since at the time any book not published in America within a year of its English publication entered the public domain here, he acted believing these books to be in the public domain and had one of those horrible 'oops' moments when Houghton Mifflin contacted the publisher. I do not believe in objectivity, and frankly admit to being biased in this matter, and most of my sources on this subject are either dead or explicitly not talking to me for reasons irrelevent here (Don D'Ammassa). Does anyone have information which would explicitly contradict this? What is on the article page is speculation as to his motives, I'm not -- given my biases -- about to challenge without more concrete evidence than I have. I think there should be more evidence or it should be dropped. -- Jplatt39 18:06, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
1966 letter from Tolkien to Sterling Lanier
10th January, 1966
Dear Mr. Lanier,
Thank you very much for your kind letter and for the useful enclosures which reached me about Christmas time. I sent the Science Fiction newsletter to my publishers in London. You will be interested to hear that on Christmas Eve (a good date) I at last received a letter directly from Ace Books, very specious and slightly glutinous, but it offered to discuss terms for royalties. I sent this also to my publishers who deal with such matters, and who have an equal interest with myself in the matter of royalties. I hope your work on the "figures" goes to your satisfaction. With very best wishes for 1966, Yours sincerely, J.R.R. Tolkien
Sterling Lanier, Esq. Chilton Books
71.183.15.178 ( talk) 23:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The following is quoted from "The Clubhouse" on amazing stories.com:
"Legend has it that Wollheim, an editor at ACE books, simply pirated the British edition of LOTR without permission and was first to publish it in North America. The truth, as revealed in an article titled THE ACE TOLKIENS, which he wrote for LIGHTHOUSE #13, is more nuanced.
According to Wollheim, LOTR first appeared in the United States in a very limited hardcover edition put out by Houghton Mifflin the same year it was first published in Great Britain, 1954.
“One glance at the first page startled me,” writes Wollheim. “No copyright, no date of publication. Just the line ‘printed in Great Britain,’ although the name of the publisher was an American firm and the place of publication the U.S.A. It was apparent that this first American edition consisted simply of sheets printed in England and imported.”
Wollheim wondered why. He suggested “Perhaps the American publisher, figuring that the book was too obscure to take the trouble, had decided to bring in just a few hundred copies and not bother with copyright complications…”
Unfortunately “the darned books continued to sell steadily, though quietly, through the years, going into small printing after small printing. Somewhere along the line, somebody started to worry about the lack of a U.S. copyright and inserted a line in later editions which said the work was copyright under the Berne Convention.”
What was left unstated was that the U.S.A. was NOT a signatory and it didn’t apply to America.
As fantasy began to grow in popularity, more and more SF&F paperback publishers, including ACE, inquired of Houghton Mifflin if they could purchase reprint rights from them. They always said no. Only Wollheim, it seems, was aware Houghton Mifflin didn’t have the rights in the first place. Wollheim pondered the implications.
Why not contact Tolkien or his agent directly?
“Please bear in mind that this paperback book industry is very, VERY competitive – and that we were in possession of what might be a very valuable commercial secret. To let the cat out of the bag could well be disastrous and could lead to other editions appearing at virtually the same time. We had no sensible course to follow but to go ahead, in top secrecy, to prepare our editions. Which we did, and the result you know.”
ACE published LOTR in early 1965. It became a runaway hit.
What about accusations of piracy? Some from Tolkien himself. Wollheim had this to say:
“Literary piracy means infringement of copyright – and we have infringed no copyrights. [Because there were none.] Dr. Tolkien, apparently, simply was never told the score about his U.S. editions. He should reserve his anger for the source of his deprival.”" 172.56.2.86 ( talk) 04:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Daughter Betsy Wollheim took over DAW in 1985, is married to Peter Stampfel, and probably deserves her own article. http://www.villagevoice.com/1999-07-27/music/parent-with-parrots/ might be a place to start in terms of references. - Jmabel | Talk 16:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
We mention "mass market" in section 4, DAW Books. Somewhere we should link mass market paperback, probably in the preceding section re Ace Books. (or Avon?)
We should also mention and link paperback original where it is first appropriate. (Ace? not Avon, i infer from reading what we say here)
And perhaps the combination mass market paperback original. -- P64 ( talk) 16:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I created section 5, Recognition, comprising
with hidden WP:COMMENT: including one at the 1975 World SF Convention and runner-up to Ian & Betty Ballantine at the 1975 World Fantasy Convention. This source lists four more during the 1980s. A laundry list is not appropriate but another editor may be able to choose wisely.
with hidden comment: apparently he was the third person inducted primarily for his work as editor or publisher, after the inaugural 1996 pair Hugo Gernsback and John W Campbell. This is a hidden comment because only apparent, not yet EVIDENT.
Someone may be able to cover what the comments indicate, using the same sources (not to mention doing better with other sources, of course).
-- P64 ( talk) 17:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
The article lacks even the barest information about his early life, such as who his parents were or what they did for a living. Religion? Were they middle class? What was his education? High school? College?-- 76.169.116.244 ( talk) 01:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Donald A. Wollheim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Donald A. Wollheim article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 730 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Guys, I seem to remember credible people telling me that Wollheim's thinking in the Tolkien debacle was -- he was unaware of the Houghton Mifflin editions until after the Fellowship came out. Since at the time any book not published in America within a year of its English publication entered the public domain here, he acted believing these books to be in the public domain and had one of those horrible 'oops' moments when Houghton Mifflin contacted the publisher. I do not believe in objectivity, and frankly admit to being biased in this matter, and most of my sources on this subject are either dead or explicitly not talking to me for reasons irrelevent here (Don D'Ammassa). Does anyone have information which would explicitly contradict this? What is on the article page is speculation as to his motives, I'm not -- given my biases -- about to challenge without more concrete evidence than I have. I think there should be more evidence or it should be dropped. -- Jplatt39 18:06, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
1966 letter from Tolkien to Sterling Lanier
10th January, 1966
Dear Mr. Lanier,
Thank you very much for your kind letter and for the useful enclosures which reached me about Christmas time. I sent the Science Fiction newsletter to my publishers in London. You will be interested to hear that on Christmas Eve (a good date) I at last received a letter directly from Ace Books, very specious and slightly glutinous, but it offered to discuss terms for royalties. I sent this also to my publishers who deal with such matters, and who have an equal interest with myself in the matter of royalties. I hope your work on the "figures" goes to your satisfaction. With very best wishes for 1966, Yours sincerely, J.R.R. Tolkien
Sterling Lanier, Esq. Chilton Books
71.183.15.178 ( talk) 23:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The following is quoted from "The Clubhouse" on amazing stories.com:
"Legend has it that Wollheim, an editor at ACE books, simply pirated the British edition of LOTR without permission and was first to publish it in North America. The truth, as revealed in an article titled THE ACE TOLKIENS, which he wrote for LIGHTHOUSE #13, is more nuanced.
According to Wollheim, LOTR first appeared in the United States in a very limited hardcover edition put out by Houghton Mifflin the same year it was first published in Great Britain, 1954.
“One glance at the first page startled me,” writes Wollheim. “No copyright, no date of publication. Just the line ‘printed in Great Britain,’ although the name of the publisher was an American firm and the place of publication the U.S.A. It was apparent that this first American edition consisted simply of sheets printed in England and imported.”
Wollheim wondered why. He suggested “Perhaps the American publisher, figuring that the book was too obscure to take the trouble, had decided to bring in just a few hundred copies and not bother with copyright complications…”
Unfortunately “the darned books continued to sell steadily, though quietly, through the years, going into small printing after small printing. Somewhere along the line, somebody started to worry about the lack of a U.S. copyright and inserted a line in later editions which said the work was copyright under the Berne Convention.”
What was left unstated was that the U.S.A. was NOT a signatory and it didn’t apply to America.
As fantasy began to grow in popularity, more and more SF&F paperback publishers, including ACE, inquired of Houghton Mifflin if they could purchase reprint rights from them. They always said no. Only Wollheim, it seems, was aware Houghton Mifflin didn’t have the rights in the first place. Wollheim pondered the implications.
Why not contact Tolkien or his agent directly?
“Please bear in mind that this paperback book industry is very, VERY competitive – and that we were in possession of what might be a very valuable commercial secret. To let the cat out of the bag could well be disastrous and could lead to other editions appearing at virtually the same time. We had no sensible course to follow but to go ahead, in top secrecy, to prepare our editions. Which we did, and the result you know.”
ACE published LOTR in early 1965. It became a runaway hit.
What about accusations of piracy? Some from Tolkien himself. Wollheim had this to say:
“Literary piracy means infringement of copyright – and we have infringed no copyrights. [Because there were none.] Dr. Tolkien, apparently, simply was never told the score about his U.S. editions. He should reserve his anger for the source of his deprival.”" 172.56.2.86 ( talk) 04:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Daughter Betsy Wollheim took over DAW in 1985, is married to Peter Stampfel, and probably deserves her own article. http://www.villagevoice.com/1999-07-27/music/parent-with-parrots/ might be a place to start in terms of references. - Jmabel | Talk 16:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
We mention "mass market" in section 4, DAW Books. Somewhere we should link mass market paperback, probably in the preceding section re Ace Books. (or Avon?)
We should also mention and link paperback original where it is first appropriate. (Ace? not Avon, i infer from reading what we say here)
And perhaps the combination mass market paperback original. -- P64 ( talk) 16:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I created section 5, Recognition, comprising
with hidden WP:COMMENT: including one at the 1975 World SF Convention and runner-up to Ian & Betty Ballantine at the 1975 World Fantasy Convention. This source lists four more during the 1980s. A laundry list is not appropriate but another editor may be able to choose wisely.
with hidden comment: apparently he was the third person inducted primarily for his work as editor or publisher, after the inaugural 1996 pair Hugo Gernsback and John W Campbell. This is a hidden comment because only apparent, not yet EVIDENT.
Someone may be able to cover what the comments indicate, using the same sources (not to mention doing better with other sources, of course).
-- P64 ( talk) 17:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
The article lacks even the barest information about his early life, such as who his parents were or what they did for a living. Religion? Were they middle class? What was his education? High school? College?-- 76.169.116.244 ( talk) 01:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Donald A. Wollheim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)