Customer Reviews

David Copperfield (Nonesuch Dickens)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

My review here is not of the novel, but rather of the Nonesuch edition of Dickens' classic. The book itself is a facsimile edition of the 1937 Nonesuch Dickens, and is published by Barnes and Noble. The book itself is in quality hardback. The "David Copperfield" Nonesuch edition has the spine bound in leather and the rest of the cover is cloth-bound [the color is orange].The dust jacket is clear quality plastic. The paper quality is of good stock and is cream in color.

The text is set in Martin's Type and the illustrations are from the original plates by A. Alexander and Sons. This is a beautiful and affordable classic [I own six of them and plan to get the rest] and the Nonesuch Dickens Classics will enhance any collector's library.

I am here also to comment on the "Nonesuch" edition, it is more than i expected in all respects, it is a hefty volume, it is very thick as well think the Allan Lee edition of "Lord of the Rings." The front has a bear featured in the oval I didn't notice this when i bought it. I wish they would come out with "Our Mutual Friend" in "Nonesuch." The paper is high quality, it is however thick too, which lends to the thickness of the volume. I am highly considering getting the "Bleak House" version as well.

This review is for an edition purchased in Europe, published by Duckworth.

If you search the reviews, you might come across two diametrically positioned views on the Nonesuch Dickens published by Duckworth/Overlook. On one hand they're deemed to be a great deal, a collectible bunch of facsimiles at a decent price. On the other, they're considered bad quality (I've read that in particular of "Little Dorrit" and "A Tale of Two Cities") as they're printed on porous paper. So the argument goes, you should instead buy the facsimiles produced by the Folio Society.

What to do then?

At the time of writing this review, I haven't been able to review the condition of the aforementioned books and decided on the quality of the printing. However, this edition of "Copperfield" I have been able to see, and actually read through. That was a very positive experience. Yes, the size of the book is substantial, but it was never a problem whilst reading, as I actually enjoyed its sturdiness and stature. This is, however, such a subjective topic that I would advice you to find a bookstore and try it out yourself. But I didn't find it cumbersome to hold it in my hands, and actually read the book lying on my back, holding it above my face (with both hands, of course).

The downside of this review is my lack of knowledge concerning the editions of the Folio Society. I would presume, however, solely based on the price that it is a superior edition. The question, however, for those buyers like myself who are not in the position to dish out that much money, especially if one is of the inclination to collect all of Dickens' writings, is much rather whether they're able to receive a decent product at a much lower price. My answer would be yes. I cannot comment on the quality of each edition, and reading the negative comments on the quality of printing have made me more alert. Yet on the other hand, I was lucky enough to find this book at the university library and thus make the acquaintance of the series. Based on this positive encounter I was encouraged to buy "Bleak House" directly from the web. I haven't read that edition from start to finish yet, but have combed through the illustrations. They're of good quality, but I could imagine some to be brighter. This, however, is conjecture and keep in mind that I haven't seen any other editions to compare the images to! I'm sure there will be more knowledgeable readers here that know better.

It is my intention to buy all of these. It is, however, misleading, bordering on deceptive, to use the quotes from Daily Telegraph and Arthur Waugh when marketing these editions, since they refer to the original Nonesuch Press editions of 1937.

Also, I would like to know whether there is an actual difference between Overlook/Duckworth editions in terms of printing quality. In my "Bleak House" it says that "[t]his edition of the Nonesuch Dickens is published in 2008, in the United States of America by the Overlook Press and in the Great Britain by Gerald Duckworth and Co. Ltd, in association with Worth Press Ltd." I would assume this is only a distribution issue and doesn't deal with printing, since the edition I have is "[p]rinted and bound in Thailand for Imago". However, if somebody knows more of this, please use the comment function below.