I’m currently reading “The Number of the Beast” by Robert Heinlein. Book is from the 1980s, and there’s a completely doubled up paragraph in the book! It spans two pages but the image shows enough I think.
I had a Book about Java with a code demonstrating to get prime numbers.
The code just outputted odd numbers.
hate to tell you this but you may have copied it wrong
tbf it didn’t say the output was only prime numbers
Nope. I remember the book also showed the output:
1
3
5
7
9 lol
that’s amazing
It was an university level textbook in my library. The cover was supposed to be a book about linguistics, but the content was an unrelated book about some medieval text. Somehow they put one cover onto another book. The library returned it shortly after I discovered the error.
Wasn’t a “prank” or a maybe returned book to get money back but kept the material?
I don’t think so. The book was basically brand new. Both on the outside and inside.
Im reading a book that says the Soviets warned the UN that Mir was going to crash to earth…in 2001.
I have a copy of Moby Dick with a second book printed in the middle of it. \s
I need this joke explained. If I read that book in school, I don’t recall anything about it sorry,
Melville goes on tangents for entire chapters, namely about whales and whaling practices.
Also, ‘Moby Dick’ is great as an audiobook narrated by Frank Muller. Got the old-timey feel that fits perfectly.
Ah! I was telling my brother how Heinlein couldn’t seem to complete a thought without going on a tangent. But for CHAPTERS! Hah I love it.
I’ve noticed this is kinda common in scifi, it’s a chance for people to bloviate about their profession or hobby. So yeah there’s a lot of side quests.
I had a copy of Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator when I was a kid which repeated an entire chapter somewhere in the middle of the book. I think the one where the Knids are first seen.
I have a comic book that I think fell off the production line and got shuffled back together before stapling.
You start from the back, upside down, then read about 5-6 pages, then flip it over and right side up for the next 5-6 pages, and keep doing that until it’s finished.
My shop offered to exchange it, but I kind of like owning a book that’s upside down, inside out, and backwards.
That kind of stuff makes for the most valuable collectibles. Like trading cards that got cut wrong or miss printed.
Have you perchance read House of Leaves? It’s a mess [admiringly].
I picked it up after hearing all the good things about Tom’s Crossing and both are sitting here taunting me. Hope to be able to dive in during Christmas vacation.
Don’t have a photo of it unfortunately, but it was ironic seeing a typo in my university’s English textbook — of all the subjects for a typo to occur in.
I have a hardback book where about a hundred pages or so are upside down and backwards. So you’ll be reading this book you’ll get to like page 357 or whatever and then you’ll have to stop turn the book over and flip ahead a bit to find page 358.
I also own House of Leaves
The most jarring one I can recall was in a Big Five published book where the name of one character was swapped for another character’s. It was jarring because, in that scene, the mistakenly identified character wasn’t even in the room, but is given a piece of dialogue that logically belongs to a different person. It was just such a weird mistake that I had to wonder how it happened. Word typo? The author miswrote it? Editor messed it up? Who knows…
An unusual error that I happily stumbled upon was in the Italian translation of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time when I was a kid. At some point, an adult has had enough of the protagonist and exclaims “Bloody hell”, or something like that. Which was translated with outright blasphemy in Italian, for some unknown reason. Maybe the translator wasn’t having it, either. Successive editions, for obvious reasons, have toned the exclamation down.
Blasphemy? In Italian‽ Gesù dolce e sottile, say it isn’t so!
Brilliant multiverse foreshadowing!
“Number of the Beast” is not one of his good ones.
It makes zero sense to me that the same people who gave us nineteen versions of ‘The Hunger Games’ wouldn’t make a movie of ‘Tunnel In The Sky.’
It got almost no publicity when it came out, so let me know if you’ve seen this one.
Predestination. Based on “…All You Zombies.”
I have not seen that, I will have to check it out.
I thought stranger in a strange land would make a great miniseries. I loved that book as a teen. I read it as an adult some years ago and it didn’t hit the same way. Still, it could be adapted to an impactful story today. People would learn where grok came from and disassociate it with Musk’s racist piece of trash (pisses me off).
The anecdote that I heard about “Stranger…” is the Heinlein made more money from film options than he ever made from book sales. Apparently, David Bowie and dozens of other folks wanted to make the movie, but it never came together.
Enjoy.
To be fair, I don’t think it would be easy to market something that faithfully adapts the second half of Stranger.
I’ve never seen the movie, but apparently Bowie stole a lot of ‘Stranger…’ for ‘The Man Who Fell To earth.’
Movies were a bit wilder back in the day. “Little Big Man” painted Custer as an incompetent psychopath and John Waters’ “Female Trouble” ran in main stream movie houses.
Personally, I think a six to eight hour limited series would be the way to go.
I enjoyed it as a teen when I read it. I can see how it’s not the best writing, the characters are very static and shallow, but I loved some of the basic ideas. I did think it got a bit weird at the end merging fantasy with everything else.
Its been a LONG time for me, but doesn’t it get weird incestous and pedo at the end?
The incest is heavy at then start, and the pedo has kinda maybe been there in his previous writing? He seems to like the “smaller” and more “meek” women in his stories, but I’ve only read a few so far.
Basically it’s a father daughter and two other people who almost had a thing, and they don’t care about flaunting stuff around.
And Deety has stated she wouldn’t have turned her Pop down.
yeah. I try to give him some grace as a scifi writer with him seeing the sexual revolution in the 60s based on the release of the pill and trying to imagine where the trajectory will end in 50, 100 years when you separate sex from reproduction. Still his take was kinda creepy and gross.
I think the worst example of him trying to write women was “I Will Fear No Evil”. It is an interesting story as it attempts to reconcile sex and gender written from a cis man in the 1970s, but its pretty messed up. I appreciate that he seems to attempt to bring these ideas into mainstream consciousness, I just wonder if he could have done some more research.
Maybe. A lot of the older classic authors have their downsides in how they write their books, and if anything I remember Heinlein’s women were not that great. I liked some of their traits, but they were in the end shallow. Fortunately modern writers have evolves, right? :/
The ending of NotB was so off for me for whatever reason that I can’t really remember it. I can remember other books of his pretty well. Must mean something. But it was the initial concept that got things going and some of the early character stuff that I liked.
[off topic]
“Number of the Beast” is a terrible novel. Just stop now.
Pretty much everything he did after “Friday” is unreadable. imho.
Very interesting premise, pretty cringey execution. I enjoyed it because I know what to expect with Heinlein.
Great Iron Maiden song tho!
I’m not minding it, I mainly read old scifi, and the light it shines on how things were and what they thought of the future is what fancy’s me. I’ve read a couple other of his books, but they were more fantasy and I don’t think I like those. I like “space” in my stories.
I see Friday came out after, I’ll have to through that into my look for pile.
The other interesting thing is the terms they use and how they aren’t PC anymore. Lots of R words thrown out back then.
Don’t know if it matters, but I was born in 89 so interesting to see a “lens” into the past if that makes any sense…
If you want old science fiction try Joanna Russ. I’m pretty sure she was the first ‘out’ lesbian SF writer. “The Female Man” and “Picnic On Paradise.”
They also reissued ‘Dangerous Visions’ and “Again Dangerous Visions.” Both volumes are short stories that were considered unpublishable in 1968.
Hrmm, I’ve got a good selection of short story compilations, I’ll have to see if her name pops up on any. My last collection spree I grabbed a bunch of I think it was “Hugo” winners? I’ll check when I get home though. Know if she made any winner lists?
I like using the short story compilations and finding authors, it’s how I selected Asimov, Heinlein and Silverburg so far. I’ve also got some of their compilations they’ve done since they are named.
I feel like Asimov is cheating since he had his own publication journal. Lots of lists he’s made.
I have several books with duplicated sections. Not just paragraphs, but entire pages. They all came from book subscription services. Not sure if they got them for cheap because they were messed up or what.
What page is that? My copy is the 1982 ballantine edition. Sixth printing.
I honestly don’t know the printing, it’s confusing me. It says both Fawcett and Ballentine, first edition, with a copyright of both 80 and 82, but the spine says fawcett, which is the earlier printing.
But to answer the question, chapter 22 pages 194-195.
This is a 1982 Ballantine first edition, but not a “real” first edition.
Fawcett and its gold medal books series were acquired by Ballantine in 1982. Fawcett was the original publisher in 1980.
The copyright is 1980. The dates specifying the edition are not copyright dates but rather publication dates. The copyright date didn’t change when Ballantine started printing Fawcett titles. They are just doing their due diligence to let you know which edition you have in your hands.
Makes sense, and yes It’s not copyright on the bottoms my bad.
I guess the confusing thing is, I always assumed the spine was the current publisher, so why Fawcett, instead of Ballentine.
And in the end it’s saying this is based on the first edition of Fawcetts? Would there be any printings from their later editions? Not asking about in general as I assume it’s per book, but for this one specifically do you know?
The edition printing is hard enough to figure out sometimes -.- no standard system and sometimes they just randomize the numbers for fun!
No worries and no judgement. I just happen to know how to interpret and decipher the colophon or copyright page.
The name on the spine says Fawcett because that’s the imprint or trade name; you can think of it like a brand. Ballantine bought out Fawcett and chose to keep the Fawcett and Gold Medal Books brands as an imprint for a while (probably because they had a large catalog by that point). Ballantine is the publisher, Fawcett is the imprint, and Random House is the parent company (and all of it is owned by Penguin now).
It isn’t “based on” the first printing or, at least, that’s only partially correct. Editions usually get updated with new formatting, fonts, cover art, commentary, and possibly light editorial revisions for typos or printing mistakes (or in this case introducing printing errors). It’s the same intellectual work, it’s just been rereleased. I don’t think there are any other pre-Ballantine Fawcett editions because they were acquired pretty soon after this particular title was published. In some of my browsing for this title I saw that it was also published by the New English Library company in 1981 in the UK.
The first edition of this from Fawcett is out there, but it’s oddly expensive for a paperback: https://www.lwcurrey.com/pages/books/169068/robert-a-heinlein/the-number-of-the-beast
The hardcover is even more pricey: https://www.alcuinbooks.com/pages/books/024016/robert-a-heinlein/the-number-of-the-beast
The edition information usually doesn’t matter unless you’re a bookseller or a cataloger or a nerd. One thing is usually true: first editions usually don’t say they are first editions; they just have a copyright date.
