Penguin Clothbound Classics

I have a couple of Austens paperback, cheap, good material, nice print. Would recommend.

Cheap shit that looks good online but when you get it you realize your mistake. Just go to a thrift shop and buy a used copy

For the most part, hideous and gimmicky. But some exceptions.

They're good, solid hardcovers that you can thrash, and they're cheap enough that it doesn't matter. The translations seem good, but you should still make comparisons between other editions. I suggest you ignore the pretentious, elitist community college students in the thread, or whoever the anons are who call these pleb magnets and kitschy, etc. Who cares what those types think? The best way to test people and discover who's decent, is to consciously put yourself in a weak position, and then to observe how you're treated. Think of the weeding out process of kooks as a blessing in disguise.

What translation is your Ovid?

Well, they're not B&N leatherbounds, but they're pretty cute and whimsical and I'm all about that.

Buy oxford or everyman or knopf, or something else, unless you're a pleb.

plebs buy GRRM etc

Norton Critical Editions (except for translated works), Hackett Classics, New York Review Book Classics, Vintage (Classics), SUNY, Clarendon, Cambridge.

i have these editions of david copperfield, the count of monte cristo and anna karenina and i really like them.

Ya this too, of course, Norton has good faust and don Quixote editions though.

Really can't go wrong with all of these as they're the same price as penguins on average.

I don't know about the translation of Faust personally but Nabokov has criticized Walter Arndt's translation of Eugene Onegin calling it "abominable," and I've heard other criticism of certain picks Norton has made for translations. Myself, I prefer to go with Oxford's picks because they're generally well-praised and often cheaper.

I've got that edition of Moby Dick. It's a well-built clothbound but the detail on the front and back covers is an iron-on decal and it will just rub off as though it were dust. I haven't even read the book yet but just through moving it from stack to stack in the few weeks i've owned it it looks incredibly weathered due to the fading decal. Like i say though, the book itself seems pretty resilient.

Wrong. They look better IRL. I have the War and Peace one and it's very nice.

Is Jane Austen the YA author of the 1800s?

I've read sections from all the popular Quixote translations, they're all shit.
Stop being a lazy fucktard.

Stop shilling SUNY - it only publishes pseudo-intellectual dross.

Asshurt rightist detected

Wrong - I'm a quality-ist. Trying to slip subpar entry into a list of eminent publishers is just sleazy. You either work for them, or have some personal connection there.

If you cared about quality you would be a leftist.

>solid
>you can thrash

I used my copy of dante's inferno to hammer in a nail the other day because I was in the shed and left the hammer upstairs in my room and the book was the nearest big heavy object. The head of the nail (which the book was being repeatedly smashed into) did some serious damage to the spine. Although the books may be sturdier than a paperback, they are not solid enough to hammer in a nail?

ugly patterns, huge ugly barcode on the back

>owns editions of books she can't even read
>jane austen
ew

>paying $12 for a book
kek

this