Library of America

[Anonymous No.23158664]

What's a kino volume to own in this series?

[Anonymous No.23158704]

Paul Bowels

[Anonymous No.23158717]

>>23158664
France and England in North America: Volume One and France and England in North America: Volume Two

[Anonymous No.23158735]

>>23158664
90% of their worth is the dustjacket

[Anonymous No.23158739]

>>23158735
what do you mean?

[Anonymous No.23158765]

>>23158739
The dust covers are excellent. Without them they are just ordinary hardback omnibi.

[Anonymous No.23159149]

I wish that there were a set of editions like library of america for the complete works of Joseph Conrad, Robert Louis Stevenson, Walter Scott and Daniel Defoe

[Anonymous No.23159195]

>>23158664
O'Connor and John Williams

[Anonymous No.23159199]

>>23159195
Good idea. Unfortunately I got all the Williams novels before LoA released their compilation but I'll do it for O'Connor (whom I haven't read yet btw).

[Anonymous No.23159456]

>>23158664
I hate the LoA. They include so much trash in it for the sake of profit. Evil, vile, disgusting bastards tainting the image and history of my country. *spits on the ground in disgust*

With that said, the volumes are nicely put together. I have the Ashbery and Niebuhr volumes. I want to have many more of the others--especially the John Adams volumes.

Even so, *spits on the ground in disgust* screw the LoA and all the vile filth filling our establishments in modern times.

[Anonymous No.23159461]

>>23159456
It's a nonprofit, nutty boy. They include a wider range to keep niche but important American authors in print.

[Anonymous No.23159470]

>>23159461
I know its a nonprofit. Do you actually believe they don't get rich off of this, you dumb little kid? They include a wider range to stuff their pockets and proselytize the population to the prevailing ideas of the shadow hand.

Spend about ten years following the money and then come back to post. *spits on this asinine LoA apologist* *spits again*

[Anonymous No.23159477]

>>23159470
>*spits on this asinine LoA apologist* *spits again*
Reddit, underage, or insanely fat NEET. Call it.

[Anonymous No.23159489]

>>23159470
elaborate

[Anonymous No.23159493]

>>23159477
Everyone who claims "reddit" has spent more time there than me. You're wrong on all three accounts by the way.

>>23159489
No.

[Anonymous No.23159495]

>>23159493
>No
OK.

[Anonymous No.23159506]

>>23159493
Sure thing, Reddit NEET. You're not Euro and it's morning in USA.

[Anonymous No.23159885]

>>23159506
Rent free

[Anonymous No.23159917]

Why are they so expensive if it's a non-profit?

[Anonymous No.23159926]

>>23159885
Hope that's your living situation kek

[Anonymous No.23160030]

>>23158664
Henry James
Wendell Berry
Philip K Dick

[Anonymous No.23160035]

>>23160030
*William James
Henry James bows

[Anonymous No.23160080]

>>23158664
When will they release editions of DFW?

[Anonymous No.23160085]

>>23160080
When his estate allows them

[Anonymous No.23160140]

>>23159195
Seconding O'Connor.

[Anonymous No.23160144]

>>23158765
They are beautifully bound books man, those cloth covers mold badly over time but keep em good and dry and they look fantastic on a shelf. Nice colors too.

[Anonymous No.23160180]

>>23158735
I hate to say it but this is also true of Easton Press unfortunately - especially their sci-fi/fantasy books with dumb looking gimmick designs, and I say that as someone with a degree in commercial printing
the entire appeal of Easton Press was the thick wood and leather bindings combined with classic looking turn of the century foil-stamped designs
the sci-fi ones have gimmicky space fonts and unsubtle design cues that cheapen the look and are obviously just for looking cool on a shelf being unread
I'd have bought Tolkien's entire legendarium from EP if they didn't have this awkward 1960s folksy fantasy children's book type treatment on all the covers. it straight cheapens them.

[Anonymous No.23160594]

>>23160140
O'Connor is one of the most funny and most touching authors I have ever read.
>>23160080
>>23160085
DFW would be good.
>>23159456
While not everything in the collection is high literature, I would like them to release collections of some pulp writers that have historical or literary merit.

[Anonymous No.23160834]

>>23160594
>I would like them to release collections of some pulp writers that have historical or literary merit
If they did that in specialized editions, perhaps. A sort of sub-LoA.

[Anonymous No.23160974]

>>23159917
The books are heavily subsidized. Let's break it down
>$15 used
>~$25 wholesale if buying new
>$35 or less MSRP for new editions that aren't super fuckhueg
Given the archival paper, smythe binding by Donahue, dutch rayon buckram covers, and take it or leave it endpapers (I like them and they're very nice), they would cost around $70-90 if they didn't have massive subsidies, little profit margin, and huge print runs to bring the economy of scale into play. Shit, I've paid $70 for occult small press of ~900 copies with a higher quality cloth cover, archival paper rated for at least 100 years and beautiful and harder to get than ever endpapers and his profit margin is...not what you'd expect. And he owns the company and has a share in the printer.

[Anonymous No.23160992]

>>23160594
They did with their Noir collections, at least. Those are numbered hardcovers and every book in them is pretty firmly entrenched in academic canon. Other and more recebtt stuff is a nightmare with rights. LoA requires relinquishing nearly EVERYTHING you can as a rights holder because these books are designed to be published in perpetuity. It makes other publishers not want to milk individual novels.

[Anonymous No.23161059]

>>23160834
I would be fine with a sub collection if they keep the paper and binding quality of the LoA releases.
>>23160992
Interesting, I think that is a great way to go about it to help capture an "era" of popular literature. Personally I would love Clark Ashton Smith or Robert E. Howard to have a LoA style omnibus ( and Lovecraft, while he isn't my favorite) as they are both quality writers in their styles and very influential in fantasy.

Rights-issue nightmares aside, what authors do you feel deserve to be added to the collection? For me, Brautigan has easily earned his place, with Pynchon and Burroughs as close seconds.

[Anonymous No.23161125]

>>23161059
You need to go on the website. Lovecraft has one, though it isn't complete. Howard definitely needs one. I think LeGuinn will get anthologies eventually, regardless of how I feel about it. Didion getting one is more in line with someone who was only recently dead getting the honor and actually deserving it. That being dead thing is a joke about the LoA selection process among living authors, by the way.

A bunch of authors have token canon, numbered works but rights hold it back. My dark horse contemporary pick would be Chuck Palahninuk. He more than meets the criteria for the most part and his short stories are worthy. The whole movement he came from is dead and not remembered. Expect 70s and 80s favorites like Updike and contemporaries to get the full treatment as people my age and older visit or revisit their work in light of contemporary mediocrity.

You want something that will at least get a paperback? Women in Sci Fi and fantasy before the 70s. The original pulp queens. I'm stodgy with genre nominees, maybe Robin Hobb if her work stays relevant and her back catalog has anything to offer.

[Anonymous No.23161128]

>>23158664
What's her phenotype?

[Anonymous No.23161132]

>>23161128
I mean in your pic OP>>23158664

[Anonymous No.23161169]

>>23158664
My choice is easily the Emerson essay and lecture volume. I love that book.

[Anonymous No.23161175]

>>23161059
It's also worth noting that Americans have serious, rightful issues with the Ivory Tower, especially those within it. What has any zeitgeist or lasting appeal has little to do with how the paper mill canonizes works and what once was and is then made beloved is often done 40 years after the fact because a lot of assholes have to die to not get laughed out of the Academy. Not that we trust it just because someone got a PhD and stanned it for 50 years.

As one of maybe 3 people reading this who has read Charles Brockden Brown, he was only of minor popularity as America's first professional novelist in his lifetime, was more a writer's writer for most of the 19th century, and is barely known now unless you're surveying influences and Romanticism. Excellent stylist and very creative writer.

I don't know how he got a volume, but I have a feeling it's because Irving, Hawthorne, Poe and Melvin mentioned him and he knew Mary Wollstonecraft, published her in fact. He had a lot of support from the assholes that were already made canon in forming the propaganda myth of America, likely after WWII for all the difference it makes.

[Anonymous No.23161177]

>>23161128
>>23161132
Don't know what you mean by phenotype. You're looking at her appearance.

[Anonymous No.23161181]

>>23161169
Shut the fuck up, faggot

[Anonymous No.23161191]

>>23161181
>Shut the fuck up, faggot

[Anonymous No.23161197]

>>23161125
Le Guin has a few, I didn't notice that Lovecraft has one, I'm not into his works as much as Howard or Smith.

I see McCarthy making it in but not for a couple decades, No Country for old Men and The Road gave him a resurgence in mainstream popularity.

[Anonymous No.23161237]

>>23161197
I need to read some Smith, and not Cordwainer. I'm a little drunk so I'm going to say that I wouldn't mind a Hispanic author, I can't think of many black ones that didn't already make it, but I'm on here so I'm a little racist and he'd have to be gay or into lizard pussy or something to get on my radar.

[Anonymous No.23161311]

>>23161191
Nice portrait, lil’ guy

[Anonymous No.23161315]

>>23161191
how did you get my photo?