/lit/ - Literature

both can be good and bad

>>13281849
Oxford world classics is objectively superior.

Whichever is cheaper for English language works, whichever has the better translation for translated works.

>>13281849
It’s a shame they have both published inadequate English translations, I usually prefer Norton Critical and Ignatius for paperbacks.

does oxford use acidic paper?
If so theyre both shit

>>13282143
Norton has had plenty of duds.
Don't think I've ever read any Ignatius Editions, might buy few to check out.

>>13282152
Oxford is acid-free.

>>13282152
>>13282198
blackpill me on acidic paper

>>13282211
it's just a meme that zoomer ecofags push hard these days.

btw here's my small Oxford collection, what other book should I get from them?

>>13282198
in that case oxford wins every time

>>13282230
moby dick and don quixote

>>13282171
>Norton has had plenty of duds.
Really? I own at least 5 or 6 (War and Peace, The Metamorphosis, The Canterbury Tales, The Prince, Pride and Prejudice, and Moby-Dick I think) and the worst thing I could say about some of them is sometimes the print is too small but my eyesight has never been great.

>>13282230
It appears that the books look much better irl than in the online cover templates. Just ordered the Canterbury Tales based on this picture. Tristram Shandy also looks gorgeous.

Usually Oxford, but they have some pretty cucked introductions, having pages-long warnings about misogyny in Euripides' plays or in Nietzsche's works, for example.

>>13282198

I just opened one OWC book of mine ( Mesopotamian Mythology ) and it doesn't say that it was printed on acid-free paper.

>>13281849
Neither, but at least Oxford doesn't have that Black spine that immediately looks like garbage once read.

>>13282259
Generally I don't mind either of them but I slightly prefer the look and feel of Oxford. Currently going through their Lovecraft collection and it's quality.

>>13282143
I would buy Norton if had the money. Their editions seem to be filled with essays and whatnot. Sadly I'm a poorfag. Their covers are total memes, though.

>>13282259
>... cucked introductions, having pages-long warnings about misogyny in Euripides' plays or in Nietzsche's works...
Maybe I shouldn't laugh, 'cause that's depressing as hell, but it's darkly funny too.

>>13282259
>misogyny in Euripides' plays or in Nietzsche's works
That sounds hilarious, are they worth reading for the lolz?

>>13282285
>Their editions seem to be filled with essays and whatnot.
This is a negative for me. Ideally I want to have no introduction, no illustrations, and no annotations.

>>13281849
Is Middlemarch worth a read?

>>13282285
>Their covers are total memes, though.
Penguin Classics Deluxe are even more so.

>>13282333
They look like tumblr tier fan covers. And the Deluxe editions have those horrible deckle edges that only autists and hipsters like.

>>13282333
JUST

>>13282230
I fucking HATE the spine of the OWC KJV. Who made that fucking decision? Get Moby Dick.

>>13282333
What in the actual fuck lmfao

>>13282333
>Penguin Classics Deluxe
>Deluxe
You're paying often 2x more for a worse product than their normal classics volumes. You deserve bad covers.

>>13282333
>Great Expectations
Are they copying the Skinhead meme?

>>13282230
Go big or go home.

>>13282318
>Is Middlemarch worth a read?
Absolutely.

>>13282369
lmao

>>13281849
Say what you will about Oxford but they can have some very aesthetic covers sometimes.

>>13282501

>>13282230

>that bible
>1000+ pages in toilet paper-tier paperback form

Lol nope.

>>13282520

Nice

>>13282230
Wild idea here: get what you want to read.

>>13282538

That's how bugmen work. Even literature is just merely consumed, rather than read.

>>13282230
Swap out your virgin Paradise Lost with the chad Major Works

>>13282244
I'm sad to report I lready have them in other editions (B&N for Moby-Dick, Alfaguara for DQ).
>>13282538
I know, I was just trying to get recs. I'll get Melville's short stories and Stevenson's Kidnapped (surprised to see they have this one) next.
>>13282549
Fuck off. You don't know me, faggot.

>>13282552
nice

>>13282524
yeah, I grew up christian and i'm used to the usual hardcover/leatherbound. seeing the bible packaged like a novel is strange

>>13282342
>deckle edges
I kinda like them

>>13282524
I'll eventually get a nice hardcover KJV Bible.
>>13282565
I'm Catholic so the KJV is basically a novel for me lol

>>13282579

I didn't mean to mock you, what I'm saying is that doorstoppers like the bible are not suited for paperback releases because it's just too fucking thick to not get all deformed even after just one end-to-end read.

>>13282520

>>13282143
>>13281849
Does anyone know how's Oxford's War and Peace translation?

>>13281849
Penguin is easily the better publisher. Most of Oxford's translations are unreadable. Their only advantage is better endnotes in most cases and spines that don't go to shit the second you start reading.

>>13282831
It has the GOAT Maude translation.

>>13281849

i have many more penguins their paper quality kind of sucks, but i cant recall if oxford is any better

>>13281849
>Penguin
This

>>13282850
Penguin is a shit publisher, how's Morrissey's Autobiogry a modern classic? For fuck's sake.

>>13282909
Autobiography*

>>13282552
Or the Norton Critical Edition.

Polite reminder that both Gallimard and Éditions de Minuit covers are vastly superior

>>13281849
Oxford without a doubt

>>13282909
You have no respect for history.

Penguin has a bigger collection and does much more to try and translate and put into circulation out of print, untranslated and new works. Goat publisher really.

>>13282244
>reading translated Don Quijote
Don't fucking read it

>>13282909
Jealous paddy fuck off

>>13282831
Its a slightly revised version of the maude with the french text is annotated on the bottom. Its very good

>>13282230
You should get some Russian classics. They usually have the best translations.

>>13282198
Acid free is a fucking meme and means nothing unless the paper is made from cotton.

>>13282230
I have that same edition of Paradise Lost and the cover always makes me smirk; it looks like he's just tossed some sort of hand grenade.

Anyone who has purchased books of the Penguin Clothbound Selection care to give an opinion on them - as of the paper and hardcover quality, overall durability etc.?

for me, it's signet classics

>>13283934
To me it seems he's a meme template for "begone thot"

>>13282230
>Canterbury Tales
>translated

>>13284527
Wrong pic

>mfw I buy a book based on which has a better cover over translations
Why am I like this?

>>13284527
I don't feel committed enough to get the original version. I barely speak English lmao

>>13284631
Because you're a normie

>>13284288
Patrician choice