Printable View
I have been meaning to buy a collection of shakespeares complete works for some time. The best one i found is the rsc edition but, the text is based on the first folio edition of the plays which from what i have gathered is a bad thing.
So, my question is:Will i miss out on the full experience of reading the plays by using the first folio edition of them or isn't it such a big deal?
Why don't you try the Norton Anthology of Shakespeare's Complete Works. That is considered a professional collection.Quote:
Originally Posted by japjap
Generally it's best to use a professionally edited edition that takes what generally are accepted as the best parts out of the earlier editions. Some plays have significant differences between the Folio and Quarto editions, and between different Folios and Quartos. The reason publishers like to publish unedited editions of Shakespeare is that it is cheaper since you don't have to pay an editor.Quote:
Originally Posted by japjap
Where a play exists in both Folio and Quarto, the RSC prints any group of lines in the Quarto but not in the Folio at the end of the relevant play.
It also includes full textual notes, so if you want to compare Quarto and Folio readings the information is there - although in small print.
The very good thing about it is there is no need to flip to a glossary at the end for the meaning of difficult words and phrases - they are all printed at the bottom of the page. I haven't checked in detail, but significant differences between Folio and Quarto are probably pointed out there as well.
The RSC edition has been criticized as you say for following the Folio so closely. Its line numbering is unusual as well. Where a line of poetry is split between two speakers, the RSC counts it as two lines. Older editions have counted it as one line.
But I think it is a good complete edition in any case.