Cemetery Dance discussion thread

[Brian James Freeman]

Any update--or can you post a teaser--on the Friday the 13th/13lb. Grab Bags?

As soon as we can get to the shelves with the books we're using, we'll get these shipping. Another new book arrives this week, blocking our access, but there should be a little break between new books after that... I think!

Brian

[CyberGhostface]

I would prefer that The Stand be one book like It was at least for the GE. 'It' was a beautiful book as-is.

[RC65]

I would prefer that The Stand be one book like It was at least for the GE. 'It' was a beautiful book as-is.

Chiming in to echo that sentiment. Even if the font has to be a bit smaller to accommodate and/or the paper has to be a bit less robust, I would find either (both?) an acceptable compromise in order to have one single spectacular volume.

[swintek]

I would prefer that The Stand be one book like It was at least for the GE. 'It' was a beautiful book as-is.

Chiming in to echo that sentiment. Even if the font has to be a bit smaller to accommodate and/or the paper has to be a bit less robust, I would find either (both?) an acceptable compromise in order to have one single spectacular volume.

+1

[TCCBodhi]

I'd like to see the 1978 version as well. One volume version, and I'd like to see the back edge uncut like the original version was as well for that rough look. If a thinner stock needs to be used for this book, it would be understandable.

[killjoy72]

I prefer whichever version (1 book or 2) that will cost the least. I will probably buy this no matter what, but I'm just not a fan of paying over $100 for gift editions.

[mkb.redux]

My vote--for what it's worth--is for the original published version. I still prefer it over the expanded reissue.

[mattgreenbean]

Wouldn't it be up to King which version were to be reprinted? Seems like he would want his complete story to be printed.

I only read the uncut version, what are the reasons for some of you to prefer the edited version?

[Papaseraphim]

It is up to King. And considering that he was 'forced' to trim the original book by 150,000 word, I don't see him having the original republished.

Just my opinion.

Nick

Wouldn't it be up to King which version were to be reprinted? Seems like he would want his complete story to be printed.

I only read the uncut version, what are the reasons for some of you to prefer the edited version?

[Ben Mears]

The decision has been made on which version (uncut) is to be used; the internal debate at CD is one volume vs two.
If they were able to publish IT in one volume they should be able to do the same with The Stand.

[webstar1000]

The decision has been made on which version (uncut) is to be used; the internal debate at CD is one volume vs two.
If they were able to publish IT in one volume they should be able to do the same with The Stand.

I agree. I think a big bas ass Stand would be best. I would push it to the binders limits too. I think a big robust book will be nice!

[Brian James Freeman]

Yeah, if we go with one volume of THE STAND, we would use a very similar paper as we did for IT. This would certainly be one big book!

Brian

[Papaseraphim]

Not this big I hope!

Yeah, if we go with one volume of THE STAND, we would use a very similar paper as we did for IT. This would certainly be one big book!

Brian

[Bev Vincent]

By my rough estimate, The Stand (complete and uncut) is less than 5% longer than It.

[herbertwest]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

[Brian James Freeman]

By my rough estimate, The Stand (complete and uncut) is less than 5% longer than It.

Admit it, you just sat down and counted the words in both books, didn't you?

Brian

[Randall Flagg]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

The Uncut was also Doubleday.
As mentioned, the decision has already been made (which I agree with). The question now is one volume or two, and if one, then how to do a quality book will match the others in height.

[Bev Vincent]

By my rough estimate, The Stand (complete and uncut) is less than 5% longer than It.

Admit it, you just sat down and counted the words in both books, didn't you?

Brian

Just now. since that last post. I'm hell on wheels when it comes to counting!

[Brian James Freeman]

By my rough estimate, The Stand (complete and uncut) is less than 5% longer than It.

Admit it, you just sat down and counted the words in both books, didn't you?

Brian

Just now. since that last post. I'm hell on wheels when it comes to counting!

[jhanic]

I'd be VERY surprised if King would allow the early version to be reprinted.

John

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

By my rough estimate, The Stand (complete and uncut) is less than 5% longer than It.

Using Microsoft Word Count...

The Stand Uncut is 473,570 and IT is 449,991.

[herbertwest]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

The Uncut was also Doubleday.
As mentioned, the decision has already been made (which I agree with). The question now is one volume or two, and if one, then how to do a quality book will match the others in height.

I know that it was by Doubleday and that the decision had been made. I am just giivng my opinion that, as the collection was supposed to be the Doubleday years (in other words, the early years) it doesnt make sense to me, even if the longer version is obviously better...

[stroppygoblin]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

The Uncut was also Doubleday.
As mentioned, the decision has already been made (which I agree with). The question now is one volume or two, and if one, then how to do a quality book will match the others in height.

I know that it was by Doubleday and that the decision had been made. I am just giivng my opinion that, as the collection was supposed to be the Doubleday years (in other words, the early years) it doesnt make sense to me, even if the longer version is obviously better...

I agree, we already have a very nice limited of the Uncut version (arguably THE nicest) and a limited of the cut would be more preferable IMHO. Brian was the original cut version ever considered or has it been dictated by SK ?

[Brian James Freeman]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

The Uncut was also Doubleday.
As mentioned, the decision has already been made (which I agree with). The question now is one volume or two, and if one, then how to do a quality book will match the others in height.

I know that it was by Doubleday and that the decision had been made. I am just giivng my opinion that, as the collection was supposed to be the Doubleday years (in other words, the early years) it doesnt make sense to me, even if the longer version is obviously better...

I agree, we already have a very nice limited of the Uncut version (arguably THE nicest) and a limited of the cut would be more preferable IMHO. Brian was the original cut version ever considered or has it been dictated by SK ?

Lots of things have been discussed, of course, but what we can use for this set has already been determined.

Brian

[Merlin1958]

If the collection is the Doubleday years, shouldnt it be the edited version of the story?
It wouldnt make sense for that reason to get the uncut version...

The Uncut was also Doubleday.
As mentioned, the decision has already been made (which I agree with). The question now is one volume or two, and if one, then how to do a quality book will match the others in height.

I know that it was by Doubleday and that the decision had been made. I am just giivng my opinion that, as the collection was supposed to be the Doubleday years (in other words, the early years) it doesnt make sense to me, even if the longer version is obviously better...

I agree, we already have a very nice limited of the Uncut version (arguably THE nicest) and a limited of the cut would be more preferable IMHO. Brian was the original cut version ever considered or has it been dictated by SK ?

Given all that went on between, King & Doubleday, in publishing the original and the fact that the uncut version is the vision of the original story in, Mr. King's eyes I don't see the debate on this issue, IMHO. The Uncut version is the purist form of the story in the authors eyes and I don't quite understand the desire for the original "bastardized" version to be validated any further than as a foot note in the history of the author. Of course, that is just one man's opinion.