[ 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: 47 KB, 660x440, a0e90a11e2859f3b458eb1244f60065a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14726662 No.14726662 [Reply] [Original]

we will now settle once and for all the greatest question of english publishing: oxford or penguin?

>> No.14726673

>>14726662
Personally i like Oxford but i don't mind all to much. If the dispute is of structural concern i haven't really notices since i'm careful with all my books. If it's about translations though, it depends, they've both published tonnes of different authors and translations.

>> No.14726686

>>14726662
Depends on the translation and endnotes, but I've found Oxford classics to be of a generally higher quality.

>> No.14726692

Oxford is higher quality most of the time.

>> No.14726747

>>14726662
Both use shit-tier paper. Avoid.

>> No.14726815

>>14726747
what publisher do you like then

>> No.14726827

>>14726662
Oxford: Better paper, better introductions.
Penguin: Better binding aesthetics, endnotes use numbers instead of fucking asterisks.
But yeah, if one of them has a better translation than the other, then nothing else will trump that.

>> No.14726876

penguin is more aesthetic, but oxford feels more academic, so you get pseud cred in your own mind. this is literally the only difference. i just get whatever the amazon prime one is that pops up first.

>> No.14726902

>>14726662
Appearance? Penguin
Contents (printing, notes, intro)? Oxford in all cases

>> No.14726985
File: 21 KB, 400x400, 3C730C8B-C327-4E15-8850-3FA5AC5FC715.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14726985

>>14726662
Collins

>> No.14727048

oxford has better translations

>> No.14727055

>>14726662
I like penguin's translations, notes, paper, and selection. I dislike penguin's covers(they break too easily), and how expensive their paperbacks are.

>> No.14727083

>>14726662
Oxford

>> No.14727097

oxford cus they have more money for fancier covers and translators

>> No.14727378

dober drift o fugg

>> No.14727601

I like Oxford, though Oxford’s use of little asterisks for notes instead of numbers gets on my nerves.

>> No.14727614

>>14726662
Norton Critical, if available. But Oxford generally as opposed to Penguin. .

>> No.14727709

>>14726662
Penguin wins sometimes. Their Paradise Lost preserves the original meter while Oxford's ruins it.

>> No.14727714

>>14726662
Oxford print literally smears under the fingers.
Also, Penguin covers are objectively way more aesthetic.
>>14726827
>better paper
lmao

>> No.14727727

>>14726662
Barnes and Noble Collectible Edition

>> No.14727735

>>14727714
Oxford has better paper than Penguin. Have you bought a Penguin book recently? The paper is like coloring book tier, or mass paperback tier. Pretty shitty decision that was apparently made for muh environment.

>> No.14727775

>>14727735
>>14727735
Like I said in my post, the Oxford paper is so thin and cheap that I can literally touch a word and smear it down the page. I haven’t really noticed the quality of Penguin paper, by contrast, which means it’s doing its job. Oxford on the whole seems very cheaply made in comparison.

>> No.14727803
File: 480 KB, 1242x1161, 79DA59FE-B105-4348-9A31-101ACF316C1B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14727803

Admire my old Ulysses!

>> No.14727810
File: 793 KB, 1242x1527, 86BE4EB1-552C-41DD-B60C-C01EBFC7B647.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14727810

>>14727803
Whose yellow pages are as redolent as they look!

>> No.14727826

>>14726662
I'm a fan of the old pocket-sized Penguin editions. they always had the most kino cover art.

>> No.14727839

>>14727810
this cream color is max comfy. Sadly modern Penguin books look grey and dull.

>> No.14727844

>>14727839
True. I’ve noticed.

>> No.14728027

Hackett Publishing is best for a lot of things but otherwise I prefer Oxford.

>> No.14728274

>>14726662
People saying Oxford has good paper quality are smoking crack. You can't even write on the pages the paper quality is so bad. Both are awful low quality mass production books which fall apart very quickly.

>> No.14728578
File: 174 KB, 640x480, [Doomed Megalopolis - 01 [6E493707].mkv_snapshot_31.25_[2016.04.23_00.39.22].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14728578

>>14727727
>Barnes and Noble Collectible Edition

>> No.14728662

>>14728274
My Penguin ass niggas out here stayin steady as shit!! FUKK nigga talkin bout what he dont kno!! if u keep talkin slick garenteed my nigga Tavarus finna find u out!! Garenteed that nigga nice with the hacking!!

>> No.14728666 [DELETED] 

>>14728274
we dont play About no antipenguin around fukk nigga, kno that. better get wise about ur foolishness on god

>> No.14728734

>>14726662
Oxford, the spines don't get ruined and the type is consistent.

>> No.14728761

>>14726662
Everyman's Library

>> No.14728882

>>14727714
Penguin classics have an ugly graphic presentation that takes up too much space and generally the images are poorly cropped. Oxford at least have decent looking covers.

>> No.14728954

>>14727714
Why are you touching the pages anywhere but the margins?

>> No.14728969

>>14726815
>book shops have led me to believe in this false dichotomy

>> No.14729027

>>14726662
I used a Cambridge edition translation of some book in my first year of a history course and the professor raked me over the coals for not using the Oxford edition instead. So I'll say Oxford.

>> No.14729128

>>14726662
I’ve found the translations in Penguin to usually be a lot worse

>> No.14729135

>>14726662
For me, it's Oxford World Classics.

>> No.14729471

>>14729027
What an autist. It literally doesn't matter.