[ 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: 41 KB, 295x450, 104C1750-CE7E-464F-9FA5-F39485C32DB3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11417231 No.11417231 [Reply] [Original]

What edition of Ulysses is recommended? I know there's many to choose from so I'm just playing it safe. Thanks.

>> No.11417251

oh ho hum; what edition he asks; just get the gabler one; you hear? just get the gabler one; it's the authoritative one that the scholars use; are you a scholar? sure you are, sure, sure; just get the gabler, and gabble on about it; as for me, i got the shine classics one; i don't care much for editions; whatever pops up on amazon i'm fine with; and be ready for a taste of it; it's a difficult book, it's a trek, it's a chaotic maelstrom and whirlwind; and different languages are interspersed in there too, like vine trellises on brick panels; like shrubberies, like a bungalowshaped house in the gardens with eaves and gables; oh, and make that with a parapet; o, and bloom has many fetishes, you see; many, many fetishes; feet, exhibitionism, voyeurism; be prepared; you were warned

>> No.11417252

>>11417231
Just face it op
You don't read you can't read you will never read.

>> No.11417260

Just get the wordsworth classics edition, it's the cheapest and although it doesn't have notes with a book this allusively autistic notes could only cover less than 1% of what's being >referenced anyway

>> No.11417269
File: 75 KB, 700x344, 61768084-A633-4F81-A9C1-2921FCE45387.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11417269

why are you guys being mean
I just was curious about the differences in the editions and the pros/cons of each... and which is suggested

>> No.11417305

Get every edition ever published and reconstruct Joyce's true work

>> No.11417332

>>11417251
what a fantastic post

>> No.11417415
File: 21 KB, 292x450, 815449BE-1CF2-4263-B7BF-056E6D36043E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11417415

I have the one in pic related. Am thinking about upgrading to a more expensive hardcover for future rereads. Not sure where to turn

>> No.11417437

>>11417231
I have the originial 1922 text with great footnotes.

>> No.11417458

Gabler changed it just enough to avoid it being public domain. He thought Joyce’s stylistic choices were typos. Go with the modern library edition.

>> No.11417533

More info please

>> No.11417540

>>11417251

fbpb

>> No.11418692

cmon
what do I buy?

>> No.11418773

>>11417415
Folio Society Limited Edition from 2004
In abundance on ebay, tho runs at about $300. I have it and love it. Otherwise get the new edition from the folio society website, its gorgeous and goes for up to $100

>> No.11418783

>>11417251
I WAS ONLY PRETENDING TO BE CRINGE

>> No.11418808
File: 70 KB, 306x475, 338798.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11418808

i read this version, don't know if it's the best but it seemed fine

>> No.11419038

>>11418808
>vintage

People need to be redpilled on how low qual Vintage books are

>> No.11419241

>>11419038
I don't think you know what that word means

>> No.11419263

>>11419241
That word? As in the name of the publisher? Lol did you think i meant vintage books in general? Easy mistake to make.
Vintage Publishing Inc. id ehat im talking about, their quality is usually shit, papers will yellow quickly, the text often has printing issues such as typos and the font of the back of their books is so bland and boring. Penguin arent too reliable either when it comes to quality but atleast theyre up and down and have produced some of the highest quality paperbacks ever. FUCK Vintage

>> No.11419560

Bumping. Which edition do YOU have?

>> No.11419692

>>11417251
based

>> No.11419710

>>11419263
gross. vintage books are usually sewn and you can bend them and twist them all day and the spine will have no trouble. penguin classics' spines crease and snap like crazy

>> No.11420426
File: 26 KB, 318x500, 7c3fc71fb1e4b6609b5d7582e4486412--james-joyce-james-darcy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11420426

>>11417231

>> No.11420432

>>11420426
based

>> No.11420575

>>11419710
Creased spines give the book a personal flair atleast, they look lile youve read them, as opposed to gross yellow pages. Vintage sucks bro

>> No.11420577

>>11417251
if this written in the style of the actual book? if so im going to pick it up

>> No.11420593

>>11417231
1922 and Gabler are both trash. 1969 is the best.

>> No.11420602

>>11417251
Replying to this incredible post.

>> No.11421163
File: 46 KB, 640x447, 1C172171-0094-4F10-8756-25C88A746B65.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11421163

Is the Gabler trash?

>> No.11421178

>>11420426
Why does Wordsworth do this

>> No.11421324
File: 93 KB, 2000x1200, 976AC49A-84B1-448C-A656-85779421720D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11421324

I've been wanting to know this as well, can any quasi-Joyce scholars recommend something suitable and compare differences?

>> No.11421336

>>11417251
whoa, anon; good, good taste; prithee, this is fine, fine stuff; keep at it

>> No.11421357

>>11420577
Every chapter is written in a different style. One is written like a play, one like a scientific journal, one like music. Its the greatest book of all time anon.

>> No.11421384

>>11421163
There is no black square in the end of the 17th chapter in Gabler’s edition, just a dot.

>> No.11421656

>>11419263
I hate vintage's red spines. Other than aesthetics though they're relatively okay paperbacks.

>> No.11422408

>>11421384
>black square
?

>> No.11422421

>>11417252
Don’t be a nasty pasty anon

>> No.11422455

>>11421656
the red spines do look a little silly but the quality is fine for the most part and so are the covers

>> No.11422477

can't go wrong with the oxford 1922 edition, it's full of typos but it's the version joyce's contemporaries read

>> No.11422901

>>11417251
don't forget his actual cuckold fetish!

>> No.11423266
File: 67 KB, 600x389, F5236E16-9F2E-4E33-A2CE-C17B66D46E21.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11423266

What exactly is the definitive edition? 1922, 1960, or Gabler?

>> No.11423269

it would take too long to read Uliyses, I would miss so much in life

>> No.11423283

>>11423266
Curious too

>> No.11423287

>>11417415
Does this version have shitty print and text? From my experience it looks like it.

>> No.11423290

>>11418808
How is this edition?

>> No.11423459

>>11423266
'60 blue penguin desu senpai

>> No.11423602

Bump

>> No.11423646

>>11423269
ive been casually reading it since bloomsday and finished today. Its much easier than I was led to believe, i suppose unless you are a literal pantsonhead unread retard

>> No.11423767

>>11423646
which edition?

>> No.11423835

>>11417251
b u n g a l o w s h a p e d

>> No.11423850

>>11417251
greatest post on this board rn

>> No.11423897

>>11423767
idk just buy one and read it

>> No.11424846
File: 626 KB, 653x1000, cover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11424846

>> No.11424851

>>11419710
this. they're really floppy, which i personally like a lot

>> No.11424996

>>11420575
>caring if it it looks like you've read it
Pseud detected

>> No.11425029

>>11417231
Either Everyman or Folio.

>> No.11425268

>>11417251
Absolutely based

>> No.11426191
File: 9 KB, 214x235, idiot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11426191

>>11417251
>just get the gabler, and gabble on about it

>> No.11426517

>>11417251
Honestly the greatest post I've read on this board.

>> No.11426531

>>11417251
*snap*

>> No.11427602

>>11417251
b u n g a l o w

>> No.11428082

>>11424846
The Patrician's Choice™

>> No.11428129
File: 35 KB, 332x499, B232C690-B797-4AAE-9857-B3AE0AD6C0AD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11428129

*blocks your path