No 'bookending' this replacement theory

Published: 04th August 2016 04:00 AM  |   Last Updated: 03rd August 2016 11:14 PM   |  A+A-

A compulsive book buyer preferring personal copies to borrowed ones, my current stock is worth at least a lakh of rupees. A Sanskrit saying goes: “A book and a wife gone into the hands of another are gone for ever.” I chase my book borrowers and evade lenders with equal success — hence the declared value. A few years ago, I migrated from the light to the serious — to law and humanities. Personal copies enable our dipping into them any time, any number of times, unlike the ones you borrowed (with no intention, if you can help it, of returning) from chaps clutching your throat limpet-like. Even now, Internet notwithstanding, I prefer print versions for repeated references. Recently, I bought from a reputed publisher a tome on Constitutional Law priced at `1,000. Back home, its cursory perusal, before detailed study, revealed a plethora of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, misprints, surfeit of quotation marks, their total shortage where indispensable etc. jarring to the eye and the brain.

Deciphering the starting point of the book’s main text and its ending thus proving impossible, reliance on any portion in it to meet a legal necessity was risky, it being unclear who said what. The publishers’ preface served as an anticipatory bail — a disclaimer that while utmost care had been taken for fault-free execution, in the event of dissatisfaction, the buyer’s option was mere replacement by another edition of the same book!

I mailed a stinker to the publishers demolishing their replacement theory. What guarantee was there it would not be still worse? It was like telling the victim that if he was not satisfied with the slap on the right cheek, he could take one on the left. I argued that the foundation on which the publishers had built their absurd replacement theory was a false declaration on ‘utmost care’. Once this crumbled, the edifice would cave in. Seeking sufficient compensation, I also clarified I was considering all options meanwhile.

The Customer Care official responded seeking enlightenment on my grievance. I replied regretting inability since I had put almost all I wanted to convey in one syllable! My mail, to put it in Wodehousean style, contained no ‘obscurity of the kind that has caused complaint in the case of the poet Browning’. Whether people out there understood, I was not sure. Probably they had a feeling that I was a nut harder to crack than they imagined. Adverse publicity also may have scared them. They promised to send me another book — costlier, but free of cost — on Constitutional Law. They did. At the end of the day, I feel I gained. I could use both, taking a little care to make the corrections myself.


Stay up to date on all the latest Opinions news with The New Indian Express App. Download now


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp