Feb.
20, 1984 Dear Jan: The printers’ specifications for NBM
call for 10-12 Times Roman, 27 picas wide, 44 lines per page. Several
of the pages in the enclosed “Sample Page Handbook” use this type face. I have reviewed the
calculations on pages 316 to 318 (manuscript pages 278A to 280). I find
that the main source of difficulty is in the values that have been used
for the number of seconds in a light year. I had taken it for granted
that this is a fixed value, and that I would get the same figure whether
I calculated it myself or took the easy way of getting it out of some
reference work. So each time that I did any work on this material, I
merely reached for the most convenient handbook. But I now find that
my physics handbook gives a value that is quite different from the one
that appears in an astronomy reference book that I have been using,
apparently because of a difference in the definition of the year, and
in the accuracy of the value used for the speed of light. Under the circumstances
it appeared that I should recalculate all of these figures, taking the
basic data from the same source. I have done this, and have shown the
revised values on the enclosed copies of the three manuscript pages.
In view of the major uncertainties in the estimates of the masses of
astronomical bodies, small differences in these figures are of no consequence,
but I suppose we will have to try to keep everything mathematically
consistent, since there will no doubt be many persons looking for flyspecks
in the completed product. As to the jacket,
since you and Rainer are doing the major part of the work involved in
getting the book into print, I want it to conform with your preferences
so far as possible, and if you really think that we ought to have a
more spectacular jacket, after you have considered the pros and cons
of the matter, I am willing to go along with the idea. My reasons for
using plain jackets have been as follows: (1) Aside from its function
as a protection for the book, the main purpose of the jacket is to attract
attention. I doubt if the jacket has any influence on the purchase decision
itself. The question, then, is: Is a jacket design more efficient than
plain lettering in attracting attention? If there were an equal number
of each, I would say yes, but as matters now stand, there are multitudes
of books with fancy jackets and very few plain ones. This being the
case, I believe that the plain jackets stand out more than the more
elaborate ones. (2) It is rather hard to find a subject for a jacket
design that is relevant to the primary subject matter of the book, since
this deals mainly with items that are either incapable of representation
in their true character, or cannot be represented at all. (3) The whole
issue is rather academic at present, as the drawing power of the jacket,
whatever it may be, cannot be exercised unless the prospective purchasers
have a chance to see it, and we have not yet reached the point where
the retail stores keep my books in stock. This may continue to be true,
even if the new book rings a bell, as we cannot get away from the fact
that it is a very specialized work. You can use your
own judgment as to style. I am rather indifferent about it. I realize,
of course, that the printers always put the period inside the quotation
marks, and I have no objection to their following the “party line” in
this respect, but I am a kind of a rebel in my own way, and I don’t
see fit to accommodate my manuscript to their ideas. So I put my period
at the end of my sentence, where it belongs, and they move it back inside
the quotation marks. I go my way, and let them go their way. That leaves
everyone happy, I guess. I am equally indifferent
about the parentheses in the quotations. Theoretically, it is desirable
to distinguish between parenthetical material in the quotation itself
and explanatory material that I have inserted, but as a practical matter,
I doubt if it makes any difference. So do whatever you think is best. I am also rather
dubious about a mechanically produced index. It seems to me that a considerable
amount of judgment has to go into the production of an index that is
complete enough to serve its purpose without being so overloaded that
it wastes the user’s time. I have a textbook on my desk at the moment
that I think may have been indexed by a computer. I find it very irritating,
as I have to look up two or three references to trivial usage of the
key words for every reference that has any real significance to the
topics with which I am concerned. I believe I had better prepare the
index, as I have done for the previous books. It actually is not such
a very big chore.
|
