Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

The Way and Its Power: Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching and Its Place in Chinese Thought
This topic is about The Way and Its Power
78 views
Book Issues > Original publication date for book with many editions

Comments Showing 1-4 of 4 (4 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by [deleted user] (new)

I have a question about classical works with many different modern editions. I recently merged the Arthur Waley translation of Tao Te Ching with the main entry. However, in doing so, the original publication date (1934) of this particular edition was lost with the original date of publication now just being for the Dao De Jing in general. Is there any way to preserve original publication dates of specific editions, or is that not possible with how the system is designed?

Another question is about the Dao De Jing's original date of publication. The site currently has it listed as 600 BC. This is certainly far earlier than most scholars would place it (Waley would place it in the 3rd century, other scholars some time in the 4th). For a date that's as uncertain for a work such as this, would the better option be to simply leave the date blank?


Elizabeth (Alaska) | 6792 comments The edition publication is a separate date/field than the book original publication date. The system will not leave the original publication date blank. When it is not filled in when the book is added, the system picks up the earliest edition publication and inserts that date - which is sometimes incorrect and then a librarian needs to change it. I have no knowledge of the original date for Dao De Jing, hopefully someone else can address that issue.


message 3: by Cait (new)

Cait (tigercait) | 5005 comments Eric wrote: "Is there any way to preserve original publication dates of specific editions, or is that not possible with how the system is designed?"

There is not a field for it, but it can be mentioned in the edition description that this particular translation was first done in 1934.


message 4: by [deleted user] (new)

Thanks for the replies.


back to top