Peter Montgomery wrote:
>Interesting. Your description of stereotype is accurate.
>what have you discovered about cliches? Therein you may
>find my answer to your question.
Peter, I'd like to hear from you what a cliche is. I can find it only
as a French term for stereotype. Please say more.
>Curious that you are under the impression that compositors
>didn't save themselves the time and trouble of resetting
>common words by saving them for reuse as needed. Very
>curious indeed. You have evidence that they preferred
>to make extra work for themselves?
What you suggest doesn't make sense with what I know of printing.
Formes are made from the composing stick which can't be set in any way
but by building the page in lines. What you suggest is a nuisance.
The work to lock and unlock the reserves them would far out-weigh the
time and trouble of setting in place. Where would reserves be stored?
Then there is the tying up of materials. Would there be sets of these
reserves in every face and point size? Type, not labor, was the
dearest element in the print shop. It wasn't kept out of circulation
any longer than needed for the pie to be redistributed. In any event,
labor wasn't organized as it is today. The various members of the print
shop had lots of time off. ... Before I get out of my depth, I'll
suggest D. F. McKenzie's "Printers of the Mind" for a great read on the
time and trouble taken by printers.
I'd be most interested in anything you've found about where, when, and
how words were pre-set and reused. The practice doesn't fit anything I
know about printing, but I make no claim to know more than I know.
Please share what you know.