Abridged versus containing some stories but not all

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

In another thread, I note that a "complete stories" was asked to be separated because some editions contain fewer/different stories. Yet, with novels, we are supposed to combine abridged editions.

How is the fewer stories of a "complete stories" different than an abridged novel? Is this a different approach for the two mediums?

[lethe]

Agreed, I find it very hard to understand why abridgements are combined with complete novels.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

I have no problem understanding why abridged editions are combined with complete novels, nor do I have a problem understanding why Norton Critical editions are also combined.

I do not understand why story collections are treated differently.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "I do not understand why story collections are treated differently. "

I should amend this by saying I do understand when the editions contain mostly - or completely - different stories and are just collections and don't purport to be "complete." I don't understand why editions of a work that contain mostly the same stories of a complete work shouldn't be combined. If a "complete stories" includes 25 stories, for example, and one edition contains only 23 stories of the 25 stories (and is titled "complete stories), then it seems reasonable that it should be combined.

[rivka, Former Moderator]

Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "If a "complete stories" includes 25 stories, for example, and one edition contains only 23 stories of the 25 stories (and is titled "complete stories), then it seems reasonable that it should be combined."

But then where do we draw the line? An abridgement is relatively well-defined and distinct from an adaptation. Collections are not so well-defined.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

rivka wrote: "But then where do we draw the line? An abridgement is relatively well-defined and distinct from an adaptation. Collections are not so well-defined. "

But we are drawing the line. Each collection must be researched. Takes up more librarian time than it is worth in my opinion. I have used Wessex Tales as an example before. Hardy published 3 different versions in his lifetime with this exact title. Are we supposed to determine which original edition the republication uses? How does this help the member who wants to read it? How does a librarian know there are 3 different original publications and not combine them? Should each edition have a librarian note? (I am of the opinion that they should all be combined, even if they contain slightly different stories.)

In this inquiry, I only think "Complete collection" ought to be combined with every "complete collection" and that we ought not to have to inquire into how complete is a complete collection.