Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
620 of 640 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
The Complete Works, but little else, January 7, 2000
I am not going to comment as so many have on the quality of the content of this book. When dealing with a writer like Shakespeare, it is unnecessary to critique his writing, because nobody would be looking at his Complete Works if they didn't know if they liked his writing. However, I will try to give opinions that may help others decide whether or not to buy this volume of Shakespeare as opposed to another collection.The binding, as some have said, is not of the highest quality, it seems. My copy is completely new (as evidenced by the "gilding" on the pages still sticking in places), yet there are significant creases where the book opens. The thickness of the paper, which some have claimed is lacking, to me seems quite adequate, especially for a tome of this magnitude. I have recently been using extensively The Norton Anthology of American Literature, whose pages are as thin as tissue paper, so my basis of comparison may be off. The text itself claims to be unabridged. However, for texts such as King Lear, where at least two conflicting manuscripts exist, the editors give no information as to what choices they themselves made regarding the text. Text that in other editions is noted as having been adjusted by editors is in this edition laid out as truth, with no indication whatsoever. If you are interested in this sort of thing, I would recommend the individual plays published by The New Folger Library, which have excellent editorial markings. Another problem, in my opinion, is marginalia. This volume contains none, which makes it tremendously difficult if one intends to use this book as reading. Shakespeare is difficult reading even with textual notes, and without borders on impossibility. I'm not sure how easy it is to include extensive footnotes in an anthology like this, but little things like the accents to show when the stress in certain words (e.g. obliged) falls on the last syllable would be nice. For the individual plays with great notes, again I recommend the Folger Library editions. I would add that the things I have critiqued here are not all things that might matter to another reader. I present them as my feelings, so take with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
406 of 432 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Only suitable for a book shelf, October 18, 2002
If you got a copy of Shakespeare's works, you might like to be able to rely on the text it presents. That would require knowing the credentials of the editor, the currency of the editing, etc...The price is excellent - what the reader receives, well... caveat emptor.Value to beginners: none (no background on the plays, glosses of difficult words, etc.)
Value to adv. students: none .
Value to scholars: less than none.
Judge this book by its cover: not. Attractive cover hides printed pages that appear to be facsimiles of archaic, crammed-type pages from some bygone era. Perhaps you think, 'Well, at least it's a cheap way to get a copy of the complete plays.' A few months of reading modern, respectable editions (e.g., from Routledge/Arden, Cambridge, or Oxford) for any popular Shakespeare play will help a newcomer realize that for almost all Shakespeare plays determining what is 'the text' is a vast conundrum; nay: an oxymoron. As with many aspects of Shakespeare study, 'tis not so easy: for most plays there are multiple alternative *original sources* - differing in important ways from each other. What sources did the editor of the Gramercy edition use? Well, if the publisher does not deem it necessary even to credit the editor's name in this volume or to acknowledge how outdated the editorial work is... A better use of your money is to buy a modern edition of single plays. Even the inexpensive Folger Library paperbacks give beginners helpful definitions for difficult words. For those planning to dive deeply into the intricate weavings and unfathomed levels of meaning in these great works, save your money by shunning this bookcase-worthy-only printing, and seek out a complete edition such as the Arden(Routledge) with helpful annotation on difficult words or the respected Riverside edition, or (best for real literature students) David Bevington's excellently edited volume (extremely helpful overviews offered for each play). (A used copy of a Bevington edition from the 1980s is worth a truckload of these 1900ish Gramercy printings.) I regret spending even these few minutes to review the most INadequate version of Shakespeare available, but am aggravated to it by the high Amazon sales ranking for this edition - which suggests that thousands of unsuspecting buyers are throwing money away. Worse yet, once they have their copies they will be discouraged from exploring the grandeur of the plays because of this archaic, alienating, barren reprint. Most will open the book a few times, quickly put it away, and stick to Hollywood productions. Ignore the respected name 'Random House' on these books and attend to the qualifier 'Value Publication' and its alias 'Gramercy Books'. We are not amused. The buyer is abused.
|
|
|
39 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A useful edition , February 2, 2006
Many reviews below fault this edition for its complete lack of footnotes, indications of what text was used, or any other background material of any kind. They have a point, but I still disagree with their criticism. The edition's lack of these materials does not render it useless. On the contrary. I own several Shakespeare editions (among them Bevington, Riverside, and most of the Ardens), and I have used them to study the works in depth. For me, this edition fills a real need: direct, unmediated access to the text analogous to hearing it read out loud. Having the Bard's complete output in one physically manageable volume (the Riverside is much too big - try putting it in your briefcase to read on the train!) unencumbered by any extraneous writing such as footnotes allows me to focus completely on the text and avoid getting distracted by the footnotes. Reading Shakespeare from this book has really changed my perspective on many of the plays because I can enjoy the uninterrupted flow of the narrative, similar to a reading out loud. One might object that I could simply skip the footnotes of the other editions. But it's not that simple. By their very presence, footnotes have, in my view at least, something disempowering. It's not me encountering the text; rather, it's me respectfully approaching something of which I'm not quite worthy. That's a fine attitude, and I'm all for it when you get to know the plays. But having dug through them, I find it a wonderful experience to encounter the "pure" text (I know that's ultimately an illusion) and enjoy it without someone trying to teach at the same time. If there's a textual crux or a term I can't understand or some historical background I want to brush up on, I can always look it up in one of my annotated editions. This edition, by its very simplicity, has really rekindled my enthusiasm for Shakespeare. Last but not least, having all of Shakespeare's texts in one small volume allows me to flip quickly to another play to look something up or spot cross-connections. That can be very interesting. In short, this admittedly simple and perhaps not completely reliable edition has truly enriched my reading of Shakespeare.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Jane Austen
by Charles Dickens
by Edgar Allan Poe
by Edgar Allan Poe
by Charlotte Bronte
See all 95 books citing this book
