[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.36 MB, 1000x1597, 601525184.0.x.1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19620286 No.19620286 [Reply] [Original]

Which cover is most kino?
Top is the first printing ever
Bottom is the first American edition

>> No.19620864

answer me, /lit/

>> No.19620870

>>19620286
Top is best. Bottom is lame.

>> No.19620883

>>19620870
This.

>> No.19620895

>>19620870
:(
I like the bottom one more

>> No.19621148
File: 21 KB, 471x640, a577e24f1431933c949921ef38ae6007.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19621148

>>19620286

>> No.19621250

>>19621148
that cover is cringe

>> No.19621307

>>19621148
I am always disappointed that the black marker letters are not fixing a misspelling. They really missed a wonderful opportunity there.

>> No.19621703

>>19621307
Yes is the last word of the novel.

>> No.19621848

>>19621703
I know but they also could have made a subtle nod to its publishing issues.

>> No.19621913

>>19620286
Top is what books should look like
Book is a really cool visual pun, but what does a piano keyboard have to do with Ulysses?

>> No.19621920

>>19621913
*bottom

>> No.19622179
File: 423 KB, 704x968, ulysses blunt 351.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19622179

>>19620286

>> No.19622304

>>19621148
Ugly, dumb.

>> No.19622411

>>19621148
fucking corporate minimalist design tier

>> No.19622422

>>19620286
I got sick of looking at top so much so i initially preferred the bottom after seeing this but then, remembering that it's the FIRST edition, the top is best.

>> No.19623341

>>19622422
But the bottom is the first american edition and pretty much the first mass produced edition.

>> No.19623351
File: 35 KB, 168x172, 1640353512415.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19623351

>>19620286
Top looks unimaginative and dull, bottom looks terrible...
>>19621148
But this is even worse.

>> No.19623506

>>19620286
The top is just text
The bottom has SOVL

>> No.19624551
File: 30 KB, 317x499, wordsworth.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19624551

>> No.19624559

I don't have a preference, it's more interesting to discuss text alterations that were made anyways

>> No.19624575
File: 799 KB, 2596x3778, ulysses_9783518458167_cover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19624575

I read the German edition. Appreciated the design.

>> No.19626052

>>19620286
Obviously top

>> No.19626396

>>19626052
what's so obvious?

>> No.19626754
File: 1.24 MB, 732x884, lzkwn9849iy21.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19626754

>>19624551
Comfy

>> No.19628075

>>19624575
gross

>> No.19628123
File: 24 KB, 328x499, 5117M1qFk9L._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19628123

This one, even though the contents are mangled.

>> No.19628226

>>19620286
top. sparse, unobtrusive lettering. it is the simplicity that does not mar the purpose of the work, nor does it seek to undermine the efficacy of the symbols themselves. the words within are bursting with the juice of aesthetic, no need to stain the exterior. the green is an excellent and understated hue, as well. No one who would be taken in by any outward flair could possibly deserve or enjoy such a text. No, the lower book is some freak, some schismatic break away from its glorious innards. Long, lank rods offer no immediate conception of any principles contained in its leaves, and the meaningless red stamp appears only to highlight the name of the artist, who had so wonderfully pared himself out of existence. No, there is no comparison, none, the fact that you have any trouble in your judgment is a clear sign that your sense is wofully obviated, by what force I do not know. I recommend you flagellate yourself for no other reason than my satisfaction. Merry Christmas

>> No.19628619

>>19628226
cringe

>> No.19628682

>>19628619
unless you're afraid, you're just grimacing. not cringing.

>> No.19628771

>>19628682
I'm afraid of how stupid he is.

>> No.19628879
File: 121 KB, 675x900, gbra,6x4,1000x1000-c,0,0,675,900.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19628879

>>19628771
wince.

>> No.19628948

>>19620286
bottom is reddit-core i.e. gay

>> No.19629130

>>19620870
>>19626052
>>19628226
>>19628948
>>19621913
>Top is what books should look like
Sometimes I wonder if on this board people really like literature and what this implies, or fell for the dark/light-academia-aesthetics meme and use it as a personality. The answer is becoming clearer to me every day.

>> No.19629394
File: 28 KB, 282x410, 56ba52844fea6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19629394

>>19620286
Polish edition i own

>> No.19629414

>>19629130
>t. bottomlet fag

>> No.19629562

>>19629130
What's so good about the bottom cover?

>> No.19629681
File: 578 KB, 1613x2400, E8C8FEA1-7A65-4491-BC19-E3B9AA53D613.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19629681

The best

>> No.19629689

>>19624551
>>19629681
>photographs as book covers
uh . . . no

>> No.19629697

>>19629130
Bottom is marxist art so you're a tranny

>> No.19629701

>>19629689
how do you think they make book covers retard

>> No.19629773

>>19620286
Both are nice, but the top is better because of references to the “blue book” in FW. That being said, I personally prefer to read a mix of three versions of Ulysses, none of which are the ‘22 one (or Gabler, for that matter).

>> No.19629788

>>19626396
The cover title on the bottom is unreadable.

>> No.19629797

>>19629788
>unreadable
Just like the book

>> No.19629910

>>19629773
>making believe to read his usylessly unreadable Blue Book of Eccles
Holy shit, someone on /lit/ has actually read Finnegans Wake. Good job!

>> No.19630581
File: 1.20 MB, 1672x2560, 95061E54-D3FF-4F15-90CD-0C510D576405.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19630581

I like this one

>> No.19630748

>>19630581
you can barely read the title

>> No.19630761

>>19630748
Only if you’re blind

>> No.19630861
File: 366 KB, 1667x1500, 808913781_2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19630861

>>19630581
Genuinely unreadable

>> No.19630996

>>19629910
Reddit

>> No.19631042

>>19630996
What did he mean by this?

>> No.19631060

>>19628123
>contents are mangled
Please elaborate.

>> No.19631076

>>19631060
Gabler was some guy he wanted to correct a bunch of mistakes in Ulysses, so he edited a new edition, but he made thousands of even worse mistakes.

>> No.19631464
File: 5 KB, 223x226, piet_mondrian.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19631464

>>19620870
>>19620883
>>19621307
>>19629562
>>19629697
>>19629788
>>19629797
How can so many Joe Rogan fans wind up together, in a /lit/ thread no less.
Bottom cover design is based on motifs of Piet Mondrian, who was among the European abstract artists that were the cutting edge of art in the 1930s. Since Random House was going for full uncensored publication in its Court cases, it wanted the book to be unmistakably found in every bookshop after legalization. (It was a huge best seller)
Top cover is the original Shakespeare and Company First Edition, ans since both export and import customs were told to be on the lookout for English language texts being exported to Britain and USA, the cover was made to look as plain as possible. Of course intellectual pervs figured out the upshot that the plainer the cover, the dirtier the text. Exploited most famously by Jack Kahane and Maurice Gerodias.

>> No.19631474
File: 910 KB, 500x333, 1600658361758.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19631474

>>19629681
my man

>> No.19631529

Are you niggers really having an entire thread to argue about the cover of a book that maybe three of you have read?
>>19624551
Incidentally I have this one, it may be of objectively shit quality but my copy's special since I got it for my 16th birthday, because my family reads, knows I read and knew I liked Joyce's first two works, unlike the fags on /lit/ who only started reading in their 20s because they thought it would make them le based

>> No.19632422

>>19631464
can I get a sauce for this?

>> No.19632431

>>19631464
I, too, would like a citation

>> No.19633033
File: 265 KB, 944x832, ulysses_dustjacket.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19633033

>>19632422
>>19632431
I've posted a screencap from Google books (which won't let you cut and paste) of a book exactly discussing book jacket designs, and here Reichl sheepishly acknowledges referencing Mondrian in his composition as many had probably pointed out to him. Further down in this capped text, McKnight-Kaufer's cover design for Ulysses is referenced to another art design, and the last few lines have an artist simply admit that her design was based on a well known motif.

>> No.19633983

>>19633033
Thanks for the sauce

>> No.19633989

>>19633033
>The "influence of Mondrian" is purely "imagined"
Isn't this the opposite of what you claim?

>> No.19634974

>>19633033
>whole book designer
So he also designed the typeset?

>> No.19636297

>>19620286
Bottom is ugly

>> No.19637359

>>19636297
Your bottom is ugly

>> No.19637400

>>19629394
lovely. poland has the most refined aesthetics on the continent imo

>> No.19637420
File: 3.02 MB, 4032x3024, FD572FCF-9611-4E9F-956A-143309F30308.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19637420

Here’s the one I just bought

>> No.19637553

>>19621848
That would’ve been kinda cool actually.

>> No.19637668
File: 77 KB, 306x475, 4A4E787F-AA05-4B94-871D-DCCFE4C53675.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19637668

For me, it’s Vintage International.

>> No.19637675

>>19637668
Something you can’t tell about these editions from the covers are the paper, and content, weight, and dimension. This one is one of my favorite editions of any book ever. The book is perfectly meaty and floppy with aesthetic and expensive print and paper

>> No.19637746

>>19631464
I actually know about this painting from an episode of Arthur

>> No.19638104

>>19633989
He is trying to deflect questioning of the design, but also should be realized that the publisher ( Bennett Cerf) and his marketing department had a hand in this, since they had to greenlight the submitted design.


I guess ultimately the intent of the artist can rest only in his mind, like George Harrison and My Sweet Lord. Anyway, this is ADVERTISING graphic design, where referencing recent cultural memes, is part of the attention catching strategy.

>> No.19638130

>>19638104
>that the publisher ( Bennett Cerf) and his marketing department had a hand in this, since they had to greenlight the submitted design.
I can even simplify this to a New Yorker cartoon


Mad Man: Hey, that looks sort of like Piet Mondrian.


Cerf: Great, let's go with it.


Reichl: WTF, that's not Mondrian at all!


Cerf: Shut up. Here's your paycheck. Thanks. Go home.