Oxford: At the Clarendon Press

[Hongyi Zhao]

See <http://thebookscene.blogspot.com/2013/10/oxford-at-clarendon-press.html> for the following phrase:


Oxford: At the Clarendon Press


Why do they not write it like the following?:


Oxford: The Clarendon Press


Regards,
HY

[Tony Cooper]

The article is not about something called the Clarendon Press or all
books printed by Oxford University Press. It is about those books
imprinted by Oxford University Press bearing the special imprint
"Oxford: At the Clarendon Press".

--

Tony Cooper Orlando Florida

[Peter T. Daniels]

It's how they've been saying it for around 500 years.

Clarendon is some sort of division or subsidiary of Oxford University
Press.

[charles]

In article <8f1a5080-290d-47ac...@googlegroups.com>,

If you beieve wikipedia:
OUP came to be known as "(The) Clarendon Press" when printing moved from
the Sheldonian Theatre to the Clarendon Building in Broad Street in 1713.
The name continued to be used when OUP moved to its present site in Oxford
in 1830. The label "Clarendon Press" took on a new meaning when OUP began
publishing books through its London office in the early 20th century. To
distinguish the two offices, London books were labelled "Oxford University
Press" publications, while those from Oxford were labelled "Clarendon
Press" books. This labelling ceased in the 1970s, when the London office of
OUP closed. Today, OUP reserves "Clarendon Press" as an imprint for Oxford
publications of particular academic importance.[85]

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[Peter T. Daniels]

It was either Murray's biography of her grandfather James A. H.
Murray, or the biography of H. W. Fowler I read, that mentioned
the merit of some elderly official at OUP that he was one of the
very few people who understood the distinction communicated by
the Clarendon imprint.

[Ross Clark]

Thank you. Always wondered about that, but never got around to looking
into it.

Just to clarify, from what I can see in (my records of) my own books,
the earlier style was "Oxford at the Clarendon Press"; the post-70s
works say "Clarendon Press Oxford". The above account suggests that
"Oxford University Press" was not used before the early 20th century,
but I can see (again, just from a library catalog) items as early as
1855 so labeled. Perhaps both were used, but not systematically until
the London office began.

As PTD suggests, "particular academic importance" is likely to be a
slippery criterion. I'm happy to see Terry Crowley's "Beach-la-Mar to
Bislama" (1990) and the Oxford History of New Zealand (1981) awarded
that distinction, but why not Orsman's "Dictionary of New Zealand
English" (1997)?

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <rn9toj$ebk$1...@dont-email.me>,

Ross Clark <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>> OUP closed. Today, OUP reserves "Clarendon Press" as an imprint for Oxford
>> publications of particular academic importance.[85]
>
>Thank you. Always wondered about that, but never got around to looking
>into it.

Maybe the other relevant bit of information here is that it used to be
common for publishers to have their own presses. Modern publishers
evolved out of two different kinds of businesses in the 18th century,
bookshops and printers. Often when these would merge, they kept the
the name of the printers as a house press name. Thus, when Fields,
Osgood & Co. merged with the printing interests of Henry Oscar
Houghton, the combined company -- Houghton, Osgood & Co.[1] --
retained the name of The Riverside Press as its in-house printer.
Doubleday had The Country Life Press (in Garden City, Long Island),
and so on. Some of these survive as imprints today, now that
economies of scale mean there are far more publishers than printing
houses. Harvard University Press has Belknap Press as an imprint, for
example, in the same manner that OUP does with Clarendon.[2]

-GAWollman

[1] Later Houghton Mifflin Co., for about a century, before a round of
publishing-industry consolidation that brought Boston's oldest
publisher under the control of Vivendi and then in an ill-fated merger
with Irish firm Riverdeep; after recapitalization and a further
merger, it's now Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and no longer one of the
major US trade publishers.[3]

[2] The title page of the first book I could find puts it as "The
Belknap Press of the Harvard University Press".

[3] Those being Bertelsmann, Lagardere, News Corp., ViacomCBS, and
Holtzbrinck ("the good Germans"). There are many more publishers in
the second tier, but many of the best-known names in American
publishing have been reduced to mere imprints of these "Big Five"
houses. ViacomCBS is known to want to sell Simon & Schuster, and
Bertelsmann has announced an interest in buying, but it's unclear if
they would be allowed to increase their market share even further,
especially if Trump loses the election.
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
wol...@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)

[Paul Wolff]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2020, at 15:21:42, charles posted:

> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 7:58:07 PM UTC-4, Hongyi Zhao wrote:
>
>> > See
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>>>>>>>>><http://thebookscene.blogspot.com/2013/10/oxford-at-clarendon-press.html> for the following phrase:
>> >
>> > Oxford: At the Clarendon Press
>> >
>> > Why do they not write it like the following?:
>> >
>> > Oxford: The Clarendon Press
>
>> It's how they've been saying it for around 500 years.
>
>> Clarendon is some sort of division or subsidiary of Oxford University
>> Press.
>If you beieve wikipedia:
>OUP came to be known as "(The) Clarendon Press" when printing moved from
>the Sheldonian Theatre to the Clarendon Building in Broad Street in 1713.
>The name continued to be used when OUP moved to its present site in Oxford
>in 1830.

I have the book 'Oxford: Mapping the City' (Daniel MacCannell) which
reproduces John Whessel's 'New and improved map of the University and
City of Oxford' published in 1832. Whessel's map seems to be
speculative in the area of the new University Press building (Jericho),
because the streets hadn't all been built at that time and Whessel
seemed to be relying on builders' plans. The streets now known as Great
Clarendon Street and Little Clarendon Street are clearly shown, though
not named; and three-quarters of the quadrangle of today's OUP building
is outlined.

But then there's Henry Dixon's 'Plan of the parish of St Giles' (the
same area) of 1832 which does show, unnamed, what seems to be today's
Little Clarendon St, yet no Gt Clarendon St, and no Press building: just
the words written in its future and currently blank location in the
unbuilt area of the Parish of St Thomas, "New Printing Office".

But there seems no doubt that the Press moved to Walton St, where it now
occupies a solid classically styled building on the corner of Gt
Clarendon St, in the early 1830s.

Dixon is believed to have been the principal architect of today's
Beaumont Street, home to the Randolph Hotel (prominent in Inspector
Morse tv adaptations) and the Ashmolean Museum.

>The label "Clarendon Press" took on a new meaning when OUP began
>publishing books through its London office in the early 20th century. To
>distinguish the two offices, London books were labelled "Oxford University
>Press" publications, while those from Oxford were labelled "Clarendon
>Press" books. This labelling ceased in the 1970s, when the London office of
>OUP closed. Today, OUP reserves "Clarendon Press" as an imprint for Oxford
>publications of particular academic importance.[85]

--

Paul

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Also in an article about the history of Oxford University Press:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Press#18th_century:_Clarendon_Building_and_Blackstone

In 1713, Aldrich also oversaw the Press moving to the Clarendon
Building. This was named in honour of Oxford University's
Chancellor, Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon.

Hyde (Lord Clarendon) was a former chancellor - 1660–1667 (died 1674).

The Clarendon building was purpose-built for the Press.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 5:05:14 PM UTC-4, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> [1] Later Houghton Mifflin Co., for about a century, before a round of
> publishing-industry consolidation that brought Boston's oldest
> publisher under the control of Vivendi and then in an ill-fated merger
> with Irish firm Riverdeep; after recapitalization and a further
> merger, it's now Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and no longer one of the
> major US trade publishers.[3]

Still, however, Tolkien's American publisher, which has kept them
afloat the way the "Goodspeed Bible" kept the University of Chicago
Press afloat during the Depression: it was the Bible version chosen
for distribution to every US serviceman. (There were Protestant,
Catholic, and presumably Jewish versions.) (Translated by Edgar J.
Goodspeed, professor of Greek, and J. M. Powis Smith, professor
of Hebrew.)

[Stoat]

On 28/10/20 8:51 am, Ross Clark wrote:

>
> Just to clarify, from what I can see in (my records of) my own books,
> the earlier style was "Oxford at the Clarendon Press"; the post-70s
> works say "Clarendon Press  Oxford". The above account suggests that
> "Oxford University Press" was not used before the early 20th century,
> but I can see (again, just from a library catalog) items as early as
> 1855 so labeled. Perhaps both were used, but not systematically until
> the London office began.
>
> As PTD suggests, "particular academic importance" is likely to be a
> slippery criterion. I'm happy to see Terry Crowley's "Beach-la-Mar to
> Bislama" (1990) and the Oxford History of New Zealand (1981) awarded
> that distinction, but why not Orsman's "Dictionary of New Zealand
> English" (1997)?
>
>

The Oxford History of NZ has two marks. Clarendon Press Oxford,
and Oxford University Press Wellington,
while Orsman's book is just Oxford University Press Auckland.

Perhaps "Clarendon Press" is reserved for works coming from the Oxford
office?
I think OUP moved to Auckland between the two dates. Harry Orsman lived
in Wellington. I used to enjoy having a beer with him on Friday evening
at the Victoria University Staff Club.

--brian




--
Wellington
New Zealand

[Ross Clark]

!!! We should meet some time. (Or have we already?)

I must have met Harry on one of my visits to Wellington in the 70s, but
he would come and have a beer at the University Club when he was in
Auckland. One time he showed up with a car boot full of the Macquarie
Dictionary -- I think he had been sent 50 free copies for being a
contributing editor or something -- so that's where I got my copy of
that. I used to send him the odd note about some word I'd come across in
my reading. When the NZ Dictionary was coming out, we got a nice
invitation to the launch at Government House, Wellington -- and I now
have a signed copy of that, as well as a suit I bought for the occasion.

To get back to the subject: I'm beginning to think that "Clarendon
Press" means exactly that and no more. OUP's publishing activities have
expanded enormously, and now take place at various sites around the
world. The Press still exists, but perhaps is not much larger than it
was in the 18th century. Only a limited number of books can be published
there. Academic excellence may be part of the decision process, but
there must be other factors. There is not much point in printing a book
in Oxford if the great majority of copies are going to be sold in New
Zealand. Etc.

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <rne397$s6m$1...@dont-email.me>,

Ross Clark <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

>To get back to the subject: I'm beginning to think that "Clarendon
>Press" means exactly that and no more.

Best to just treat it like any other major publisher's imprint names:
an indication of which particular set of editors decided to give the
author a publishing contract. This is used primarily for sales and
marketing purposes, and doesn't really mean much for the reading
public, except perhaps as branding to indicate "this is the sort of
book that people who like this sort of book like".

-GAWollman

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 12:03:08 PM UTC-4, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <rne397$s6m$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Ross Clark <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

> >To get back to the subject: I'm beginning to think that "Clarendon
> >Press" means exactly that and no more.
>
> Best to just treat it like any other major publisher's imprint names:
> an indication of which particular set of editors decided to give the
> author a publishing contract. This is used primarily for sales and
> marketing purposes, and doesn't really mean much for the reading
> public, except perhaps as branding to indicate "this is the sort of
> book that people who like this sort of book like".

But in a bibliography you do say Oxford: Clarendon, but you don't
say Cambridge: Belknap. The Chicago Manual of Style explicitly says
that its (former) series label "Phoenix Books" (the phoenix is on
the University's seal, representing Chicago rising from the ashes
some 20 years before its founding) should not be mentioned.

[Stoat]

We may have met because I was also at the launch. I see that you are in
the list of benefactors, as is my wife, whose aunt Ruth Mason was one of
the dedicatees.

One the the benefits of being part of a university is the opportunity to
meet interesting people, especially those outside one's own area. Harry
was one such, as was Ian Gordon.