Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

I did some work with Peter S. Beagle's page earlier this year. Among other changes, I separated The Last Unicorn into three distinct versions:

1) The original 1968 novel
2) A later edition that included the 2005 companion/sequel novella
3) A 2007 publication of a very different early draft

Another librarian has recently combined my Versions (1) and (2). I really think they ought to be separate, but I don't want to get into a tug-of-war on this book. So I seek advice: Am I wrong to want them separated?

Thanks much for your help!

Combination page here.

I would assume that the novel+sequel should be separated from just the novel.

eh.. It's not another book it's just one of those bonus short stories. It's included in the deluxe edition as bonus material. It's not two different books. One edition just has more content in the form of a short story.

I would've combined them. I don't see how it's different from something like a Norton Critical Edition with all of the essays in the back, or any other edition of a book containing a bonus story. Should all of that be separated as well?

As far as I am aware, according to the Librarian rules here, if there is sufficiently more/different material in an edition, it should be separated.

So the question is, is it significant enough in this case to warrant a separate book.

Amanda (JT) wrote: "So the question is, is it significant enough in this case to warrant a separate book."

Yes, I think you're exactly right. I can think of two other instances off the top of my head (Stealing Magic and Water) where the reprint editions contained more material than the original editions did (two stories in the former and one in the latter), but those editions are still combined and considered as one work. But then again, those instances involve story collections and not novel/novella combinations.