Identity area
Reference code
Title
Date(s)
- 14 July 1939 (Creation)
Level of description
Extent and medium
1 single sheet
Context area
Name of creator
Repository
Archival history
Immediate source of acquisition or transfer
Content and structure area
Scope and content
Picket Piece, Wendover, Bucks.—Repeats his suggestion that the lectures on elementary bibliography he gave at King’s College, London, might make a useful introductory book.
(Typed transcript. The original was sent to R. W. Chapman with the original of Add. MS a. 355/6/1a and the text of ‘Elements of Bibliography’ (perhaps Add. MS a. 355/6/2b).)
—————
Transcript
COPY
Picket Piece, Wendover, Bucks.
14th July 1939.
Dear Chapman,
You may remember that when I saw you at Oxford in March, or thereabouts, I mentioned a short series of lectures on very elementary bibliography that I had been in the habit of giving at King’s College, London, for many years past and that I thought might, if printed, be a useful introduction for people who don’t want to go far with the subject, and also perhaps for the beginnings of librarianship course (most of which are said to be very bad—far from clear and too full of detail). The stuff had become unreadable through much alteration, and so I had it typed. The idea is that if you think there is the making of a little book in the lectures (price 4/- or so), I will take them away when I go for a holiday and see about improving them—the stuff can mostly be done without books. It could be done very quickly if I felt like it, and would not interfere with anything else. The main point is (if you think it worth publishing)—should the lecture style be entirely abolished, i.e. should I turn ‘Always be careful not to mix up …’ into ‘Care should be taken not to confuse …’ or ‘to differentiate between …’ Personally I see no harm in the former. Of course one has to explain a lot that one makes clear in a lecture by showing things, but I think I have already put in most of these necessary explanations.
If you don’t want the stuff, do you think that publication elsewhere could damage your rights in the ‘Introduction to Bibliography’? I dare say Sidgwick and Jackson would do it if you would rather not, but of course this would only be if you did not think it could harm the larger book.
I need hardly say that if you approve of the book in general I should be very glad of any comments or suggestions for improvement.
Yours sincerely,
(Signed) R. B. McKerrow
P.S. | Just going to Cliftonville for a fortnight (for health, no other reason!). Am not well, but think I now see a chance of improvement, perhaps cure.
—————
At the head is the reference ‘P.12977’.