I'm not sure exactly how this guy came up with his criteria for what to include in this book and what to leave out. There is no Kurt Vonnegut, no Toni Morrison, no Saul Bellow, and no J.D. Salinger. Morrison and Bellow are both Nobel laureates in "20th century fiction"! And Salinger's first edition of Catcher in the Rye is probably one of the most sought-after books in this category. On top of this, the book is full of editorial errors. Not worth the trouble.

a very shoddy and error-filled attempt at a reference manual for modern firsts. has peter benchley, but not james ellroy, dean koontz, but not dennis lehane, micheal dorris, but not robert crais. a waste of money.

Some useful info but it's absurd that this is a "2000 edition" and covers books up to about 1993! What did he do when he updated this book, close his door and stay inside from 1993 to 1999 writing this book, ignoring any books written after 1993? Weird.

What boggles my mind is how few books there are on pricing and grading first edition books, and the ones that do exist are not very good, including Aherns. Why can't someone come out with a decent one like they do for comic books (Overstreet, etc)?

In the introduction to this book, Mr. Senior states (rather proudly I might add) that he has so very professionally hacked away 2 thirds( aw, just a few sentences..) of the entire story. He claims that much of it was needless details (such as descriptions of battles, ect.) but rambles on to announce that he has cleanly ripped away a few other side plots not necessary to to the well-being of the whole (as he sees it); any of the adventures of Sir Gareth, you won't find here. Other knights seem to drop into the story, and while all of the characters in the tale will appear to know who they are, you are left in the dark, because they happened to be on the editor's 'bad list' and their earlier excursions were deleted.
But then Mr. Senior finishes with this; that we must "not bewail these losses" (after all, he knows what he's doing). I suppose 2 thirds of Sir Thomas Malory's work was in vain.