ARC Question

I think I found an ARC.

It's a copy of Elizabeth Peters _Trojan Gold_ (Atheneum, 1987) with the top
page edges and the first page after the free endpaper stamped NOT FOR
RESALE. It's a first edition to all appearances.

I've used it as an example of an ARC on my "Visual Aids" Remainder and Other
Edge Marks page
( http://home.att.net/~my_wings/visual-aids/remaindermarks_.html ) with the
following explanation:

"Publishers sometimes send ARCs (Advance Reading Copies) to reviewers and
store purchasers prior to the publication of the book. A NOT FOR RESALE
notation is expected for this class of publication, and ARCs are one of the
few cases where a page edge marking will not reduce the value. That said,
even though it might look just like one, an ARC is not the same as a first
edition, it should never be described as such, and it will usually (although
not always) be priced lower."

Have I got this identified correctly and described correctly? Comments from
those who are actually familiar with ARCs in more than theory are greatly
appreciated.

Thanks!

Alice

"my-wings" wrote...
 > I think I found an ARC.
 >
 > It's a copy of Elizabeth Peters _Trojan Gold_ (Atheneum, 1987) with the
top
 > page edges and the first page after the free endpaper stamped NOT FOR
 > RESALE. It's a first edition to all appearances.
 >
 > I've used it as an example of an ARC on my "Visual Aids" Remainder and
Other
 > Edge Marks page
 > ( <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://home.att.net/~my_wings/visual-aids/remaindermarks_.html" target="_blank">http://home.att.net/~my_wings/visual-aids/remaindermarks_.html</a> ) with
the
 > following explanation:
 >
 > "Publishers sometimes send ARCs (Advance Reading Copies) to reviewers and
 > store purchasers prior to the publication of the book. A NOT FOR RESALE
 > notation is expected for this class of publication, and ARCs are one of
the
 > few cases where a page edge marking will not reduce the value. That said,
 > even though it might look just like one, an ARC is not the same as a first
 > edition, it should never be described as such, and it will usually
(although
 > not always) be priced lower."
 >
 > Have I got this identified correctly and described correctly? Comments
from
 > those who are actually familiar with ARCs in more than theory are greatly
 > appreciated.

I would describe your book as a review copy rather than an ARC. The books I
have that are stamped like this are all genuine first printings--same
binding and jacket as the copies released to the trade--not specially
produced advance reading copies. At least for myself, I don't think that
the stamp reduces its desirability--just the opposite. But it's a matter of
taste, of course.

Other thoughts:

The Simon & Schuster logo is "the sowing man"; he's got a seed bag over his
left shoulder, and his right hand is spreading the seeds (of knowledge, one
presumes).

Another type of remainder mark--no longer in use, but you might run across
it on older books--is the purple spray used by Doubleday, Delacorte, and
perhaps some others. This stuff was sprayed on the entire top or bottom
edge of the book, leaving a speckled stain--though I recall reading
somewhere that it comes out easily with bleach.


--
Jon Meyers
[To reply,
lose your way.]<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->