Which Fine Press is doing Flowers for Algernon?

Just got a message from Consensus press that another fine press is doing Flowers for Algernon (the novel). Guesses as to which press? I think Suntup is probably the obvious choice given how many books they publish.

I guessed Suntup in the previous thread, with the caveat that they might not be considered fine press. (I suspect the board of CP probably wouldn't find them to be.) If that's the case, perhaps Arion or Nawakum.

>1 punkzip:
>2 Shadekeep:

Not Suntup. It's much better than that.

I think it is Amaranthine because Marko had mentioned a few times that it is one of his favourite novels and he would love to publish it

>3 dlphcoracl: Now that I read the other thread I noticed your prior message. Given your opinion of the current Arion press I'm guessing it is not Arion either.

>4 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: That's a very logical guess and a strong candidate.

>5 punkzip:

Correct. It is not Arion Press.

It feels frustrating that we don’t know as the CP membership might vote in different ways if they thought the rival version was going to cost $300 compared to being $3000

>1 punkzip: It's obviously The Agreement Press!

Well, in addition to Arion, we can probably rule out St. James Park Press, Nawaum and No Reply Press, unless one of the Advisory Board members was just quietly waiting to see what happened.

I wonder if it's the Conversation Tree Press title that's to be announced next week. Their hints were "award winning," "millions of copies sold" and "never been published in fine press," the timeline makes sense and I'm sure Tony is aware of Consensus Press to give a heads up.

>8 DMulvee:

Not to worry.

The 'rival' private press will offer Flowers for Algernon in several states with varying price points. Unlike the Consensus Press, this press will be much less price constrained than the CP and will have much greater freedom and latitude to "get it right". As I stated on the CP, this is a Win-Win and I say this as the CP member that originally proposed Flowers for Algernon.

>10 NathanOv: CTP has not published anything yet so would the Oracle describe it as a “top tier” fine press? The same logic could be used to argue against Amaranthine as they have not published anything in letterpress yet.

I see two possible presses: Thornwillow or Foolscap 😊

>13 Dr.Fiddy: Foolscap doesn’t do multiple states - at least so far.

>14 punkzip: Ah, yes... didn't see it until now that it would be several states...

No one's mentioned Arete and Lyra's yet. I imagine this could be a fit for either.

>14 punkzip: Does this count as multiple states? 175 regular and 40 special.

http://www.foolscappress.com/phisicke.php

>17 Lukas1990: forgot about that. But that’s an early publication - newer releases have all been one state. In any case it doesn’t quite seem to be in Foolscap’s wheelhouse. I like Lyra’s and Arete of the guesses so far.

Yes, I agree that it would be very weird for Foolscap to print Flowers for Algernon. I was even surprised that they did 'Brief Loves That Live Forever.'

While it could be Thornwillow, it just doesn't seem like a book they would do (just gut feeling). I think Arete or Lyra is the most likely candidate.

No one has mentioned Barbarian Press, but they seem even less likely to publish this than Thornwillow.

As an aside, I'm surprised that Folio Society hasn't published Flowers for Algernon. With its shift in focus toward sci-fi/fantasy in recent years, it would be a logical choice.

>20 ultrarightist:

Flowers for Algernon is an obvious "miss" for the Folio Society because this is the kind of book they do extremely well, as witnessed by their superb 75th anniversary edition of 'The Neverending Story'. Algernon has been repeatedly recommended to the FS by its readership, so this oversight is inexplicable. Similarly, A Canticle for Leibowitz is another obvious FS oversight despite strong support from the FSD.

>21 dlphcoracl: Exactly. I completely agree.

Easton Press published the most beautiful edition of Flowers for Algernon --

*Signed by the Author
*Original illustrations (I believe 8 specially commissioned illustrations)
*High-quality slipcase
*Beautiful design
*Limited to 600 Numbered Copies

It was released a decade ago, and is signed by Daniel Keyes (who sadly passed away in 2014). It is quite affordable on the second-hand market. I personally quite value an author's signature, and aside from that, the original illustrations are also wonderful. It is of course not letterpress. That said, if anyone is looking for a beautiful edition that is SIGNED by the author, this is the best option! Interestingly enough, Easton Press also released a signed edition by Keyes for their Masterpieces of Science Fiction collection. However, that particular edition had no illustrations that I am aware of. Anyway, some options available for those looking for quality edition, albeit, not letterpress.

My guess would also be either Arete or Lyra’s. My immediate instinct was Arete, they’re publishing Brave New World and attempted to publish Handmaid’s Tale. Those titles are closer to Algernon than what the other Fine Presses publish.

It’s Conversation Tree!

>25 Nightcrawl: So it is.

https://conversationtreepress.com/blogs/news/flowers-algernon-daniel-keyes

Very interested to see what it develops into, and much respect to them for not taking preorders until the process is further along.

As exciting as the CTP announcement of the first private press edition of 'Flowers for Algernon' is, the best is yet to come. Stay tuned for the next announcement, i.e., the forthcoming book Tony Geer hinted at in his March Gyaff/Newsletter being illustrated by Marc Castelli. It will (imho) be a "must-have".

>28 dlphcoracl: Based on some of your recent comments, you seem to have a high level of confidence in CTP, which has not yet produced a single book. While I am optimistic about the press and have ordered its first title, I'm curious as to the reasons for your level of confidence.

>29 ultrarightist: It's so fascinating comparing the perceptions between Conversation Tree and Curious King presses.

Both have the same exact people making the books with Pat Randle printing and the team at Ludlow binding, both are focused primarily on genre fiction, both have absolutely massive publication queues, yet Conversation Tree has driven much more positive conversation and seems to have inspired a lot more confidence by the way they handle simple things.

>29 ultrarightist:

My level of confidence is based upon the book design decisions made in the forthcoming Deluxe (numbered) CTP edition of Peter Pan, specifically:

1. Beautiful classic book design reminiscent of the design(s) used for the full vellum & gilt editions of the Golden Era illustrated fairy tale books.
2. Selection of Pat Randle/Nomad Letterpress for the letterpress printing.
3. Selection of Ludlow bindery for the full morocco binding.
4. Selection of goatskin leather (probably Harmatan, if Ludlow is doing the binding).
5. Selection of Magnani Pescia Edition 160gsm paper.
5. Selection of Charles Vess as illustrator - a perfect choice.

I am not sure what you are looking for, but this should tell you all you really need to know. With this information I do not need to have book-in-hand to know this will be a superb, highly collectible edition for those interested in the literary choice of Peter Pan.

>30 NathanOv:

The differences are - and why I am not interested in the Curious King (CK) editions:

1. The literary matter itself. CK seems to have focused on the Suntup/Centipede Press genre and their specific choices did not register with me.

2. Superior paper planned for the deluxe (Numbered and Lettered) edition of the CTP Peter Pan compared to the papers used by CK.

3. The over-the-top/in-your-face Suntup Press style illustrations used by CK versus classic illustrations from top-notch artists such as Charles Vess and Marc Castelli.

Curious King and CTP are VERY different in my view and are focused on different readerships.

>30 NathanOv: However, CK releases seems to, at least so far, have sold much better. However, this may be related to title choice, and we only have one data point from CTP so far. This may change in the future of course.

>31 dlphcoracl: That's what I was looking for, thanks.

I ordered the deluxe (numbered) CTP edition of Peter Pan, too.

>32 dlphcoracl: The Weird fiction line from CTP is Centipede Press territory. I don't see much difference in the potential buyer base. I don't think the overall size of the market is that large to begin with to be that differentiated. It's really presses like Barbarian, which don't focus on YA, genre, or "famous" titles to begin with where the buyer base is probably different.

Most of my concerns about CK are that we still haven't seen any interior text pages (that I'm aware of) for The Blade Itself or The Fifth Season, and the text design the press proprietor used for his one-off Gardens of the Moon, photos of which are available in his blog, don't thrill me.

>28 dlphcoracl: Looking at Marc Castelli's artwork I keep hoping it will be Captains Courageous but the descriptions all seem to fit Huckleberry Finn, which is of course a great book too. Any idea when we will officially know the next title?

>31 dlphcoracl: Very true and well said

>37 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: I'm not getting Huck Finn from the descriptions -- where's the English component of the historical context?

>39 kermaier: it was first published in the UK.

>39 kermaier: It was first published in UK just before the US edition. That was one other reason I was hoping it might be Captains Courageous as Kipling is English and this was the only book of his which is entirely placed in America; but the rest don't fit

>36 ambyrglow: Some interiors have been posted on the Instagram by the printers. I think the name is somewhere in the Curious King thread.

>42 jordanxn: The printer posted the title page. They haven't yet posted any pictures of the actual text block, or even (as far as I can tell) shared basic information like typeface.

>43 ambyrglow: There was a story posted showing the actual text block, but it does not appear to have made it into a post, unfortunately.