Favourite Publishers

[F.Emerald]

Publishers; do you have favourite editions, are there any you can't stand, or does it not make any real difference to the reading experience?

I particularily favour: Penguin Classics and Modern Classics, and Oxford World's Classics.
I particularily dislike: New Windmill, Penguin Popular Classics, and Wordsworth Editions.

[Neo_Sephiroth]

I favor the ones you favor.:D

I dislike the ones you dislike.:sick:

Why? I don't know...http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v519/Heather71/Smilies/icon_confused.gif

All I know is that I prefer it to be as close as to the original as possible if they're trying to bring back a classic such as Dante's Divine Comedy.

[Wild Apple]

I like Everyman's Library (specifically cloth) for its nice quality of paper and print and its simple but attractive covers.

Oxford World Classics and Penguin Classics are OK and I have plenty of them. Norton Critical Editions provide good background and crticisim, but look better in the classroom than they do at home.

I loathe any mass market paper backs.

[F.Emerald]

It's just a trivial thing really, but personally, I care about the appearance of my books. No bent spines or mismatching bookmarks on my book shelf!

But books like Oxfords provide good notes as well. I also think a good quality book is important, it adds to the reading pleasure.


I loathe any mass market paper backs.

Why is that?

[Wild Apple]

Why is that?

Because of the yellowish paper and blurry print. Also, they don't have any room in the margins to make notes. They are a good cheap alternative for people who don't mind those things.

I own a couple, but they were gifts.

[subterranean]

I personally favor Wordsworth and Penguin. When I was in college, my most favoured text book publishers were Routledge and Prentice Hall.

[F.Emerald]

Because of the yellowish paper

Oh no, I prefer that, yellowing paper gives the book a certain patina.

And does anyone else find the smell of books to be really nostalgic and lovely?

...Or is that just me?

[Laindessiel]

Puffin Classics and Penguin Classics. They still retain the original authors' depth and unabridged words. And also Scholastic.

I don't like USBPD.

[Laindessiel]

Oh no, I prefer that, yellowing paper gives the book a certain patina.

And does anyone else find the smell of books to be really nostalgic and lovely?

...Or is that just me?

When they're dusty and an irritant to the nose, not lovely. But I like their ancient smell. My mom has a history textbook dating back in the 70's and although it's prone to being ripped in pieces, I love holding and reading it because I know that once upon a time, it served in my mom's life. Nostalgia splashes...:)

[aeroport]

I am a fan of the Everyman's Library cloth editions as well, but as a student, and one who increasingly finds himself in general scribbling things all over the pages, I am making fast friends with the paperback.
I like Modern Library and Penguin Classics both tremendously, though I've heretofore found the latter to generally have superior endnotes. Oxford World's Classics is decent, and Norton is positively awesome for study, in my opinion, considering all the outside texts they typically include.

I do not like the smell of most Signet publications.

[Laindessiel]

(Nice new "namesian", James...)

[F.Emerald]

I am a fan of the Everyman's Library cloth editions as well.

I don't like the jackets so I take them off, but then the ink rubs off the spine and it looks awful.

[bluevictim]

I've taken a liking to The Library of America (http://www.loa.org). The volumes are nice looking, and the printing is clear; they even include some explanatory notes.

[SaGe]

love Penguin Classics.

[kathycf]

Tor books is a pretty decent fantasy publisher. I also like the one that publishes unabridged large print editions (can't think of the name off hand). Very helpful for people like me with poor eyesight.

[Rosalind_May]

Penguin Classics, definately. The paper is nice quality, the notes and extras to the book are normally of a good quality, and, for the most part, they're pretty cheap.

They've already been mentioned but I'm not keen on Wordsworth or Penguin Popular Classics, and I'll vehemently disagree with anyone who says the quality of the book (at least, its physical quality) can't add or detract to it. To me, reading a book with crappy quality paper tends to be like watching a film on pirate DVD: even if the content is fabulous, the experience just isn't the same.

[F.Emerald]

They've already been mentioned but I'm not keen on Wordsworth or Penguin Popular Classics, and I'll vehemently disagree with anyone who says the quality of the book (at least, its physical quality) can't add or detract to it. To me, reading a book with crappy quality paper tends to be like watching a film on pirate DVD: even if the content is fabulous, the experience just isn't the same.

Precisely my point.

[Wild Apple]

Penguin Classics, definately. The paper is nice quality, the notes and extras to the book are normally of a good quality, and, for the most part, they're pretty cheap.

They've already been mentioned but I'm not keen on Wordsworth or Penguin Popular Classics, and I'll vehemently disagree with anyone who says the quality of the book (at least, its physical quality) can't add or detract to it. To me, reading a book with crappy quality paper tends to be like watching a film on pirate DVD: even if the content is fabulous, the experience just isn't the same.

I agree that the quality of a book adds to a certain experience, but disagree with the comparison. Vision is entirely necessary for film. That isn't the case for literature.

In other words, the quality of a book may detract from a certain experience that we enjoy, but it certainly does not detract from the book itself. If we can't agree on this, you aren't allowing a blind person to read the same book, as he or she must use braille.

[grace86]

My favorite publisher is Barnes and Noble. They publish the classics in mass market paperback, paperback and hardcover, and their translations are very nice, and so is the quality. I think I can get an unabridged copy of Don Quixote or War and Peace for seven dollars (paperback). Like I said, the quality is very good - the type and the paper and cover design and binding.

I also like their introductions, quotes from the book and bottom references. I dislike the mass market ones though for the same reasons as mentioned before me - blurry type and small margins. I've had a page fall out of one of them. But they are okay.

But I also like Penguin and Modern Classics as well. Probably Modern Classics more. For hard covers though (that Barnes and Noble also do) I prefer Everyman Library. I like my expensive hardcovers, which perhaps explains why I have no Everyman or Modern hardcovers but do have B&N hardcovers.

Good topic.

[F.Emerald]

But I also like Penguin and Modern Classics as well. Probably Modern Classics more. For hard covers though (that Barnes and Noble also do) I prefer Everyman Library. I like my expensive hardcovers, which perhaps explains why I have no Everyman or Modern hardcovers but do have B&N hardcovers.

What? Everymans are much more expensive than B&Ns...well, in England anyway.

[grace86]

What? Everymans are much more expensive than B&Ns...well, in England anyway.

The B&Ns in hardcover and paper are cheap...yes...the Everyman's are real expensive (for me anyway)...which explains why I don't have any Everyman's. I have expensive tastes I guess. :D

[F.Emerald]

The B&Ns in hardcover and paper are cheap...yes...the Everyman's are real expensive (for me anyway)...which explains why I don't have any Everyman's. I have expensive tastes I guess. :D

Yes...but then if you liked expensive books then surely you'd own more Everymans? Hmm :confused:

[grace86]

Funds are low in that area and I've no bookshelf to put them on. I'd hate to buy nice hard covers and not be able to display them. I am already angry I cannot put my paperbacks on a shelf. :(

But I suppose I should start my collection in hardcover sometime.

[F.Emerald]

Oh, I see. Yes, hardcovers are way too expensive, especially those lovely Everyman's Library ones *drool*

[grace86]

Oh, I see. Yes, hardcovers are way too expensive, especially those lovely Everyman's Library ones *drool*

:nod: yes, drool, you know they should make a smilie for that.

I especially want the Robert Fagle's translation of the Iliad in Everyman's. That will be my first one! :D

[F.Emerald]

I especially want War and Peace in Everyman's, but it's like £35! About $60. Goodness.

[vel]

Being the light of my husband's life, I am spoiled. We have a wonderful library of Folio Books, published as the authors intended. Truely beautiful editions. It is a joy to read Dickens with all of Boz's illustrations gambolling out of the pages to delight my eyes. After reading Kipling's "Just So Stories", I know why he began each story with..."O Best Beloved" for he wrote them as a gift for his wife...

[F.Emerald]

Being the light of my husband's life, I am spoiled. We have a wonderful library of Folio Books, published as the authors intended. Truely beautiful editions. It is a joy to read Dickens with all of Boz's illustrations gambolling out of the pages to delight my eyes. After reading Kipling's "Just So Stories", I know why he began each story with..."O Best Beloved" for he wrote them as a gift for his wife...

Don't Folio books only publish French?

[F.Emerald]

Oh, and I forgot to add Vintage International editions to my favourites! They're wonderful; they look different and its practically impossible to bend the spine (I can't stand scruffy bent spines) as they're very, erm...floppy.