What does /lit/ think about Everyman's Library? I was thinking about buying some classic books.
Fine. Buy with confidence. One of the better publishers for affordable hardcovers of classic titles, usually uses good translations for foreign works, and typically contains sufficient notes/intro/contextual info.
they're good but expensive. hold out and look at library book sales and stuff, or at least buy used. They're all over the place.
Excellent series. Beautifully made books. Sewn signatures. There's about thirty books from them that I want to buy. I love that they pack multiple titles into one volume. E.g., Updike's Rabbit tetralogy, Didion's nonfiction, McCarthy's Border Trilogy. Love it.
They're under the same corporate umbrella as Vintage, so I hope they one day publish Mishima's Sea of Fertility books in one volume.
Here's a list of all their books:
http://sevenroads.org/Everyman/Serial.html
>>7572384
This. I got 2 in good condition for $1 each at a library sale.
>>7572377
I've got a few of works of Russian authors and like them. The dustjackets are a bit shitty, but the hardcover underneath are classy and pretty. Quality is very good, and for the bookstore I use, the price isn't higher than most other publishers.
Translation choices in the works I have by Everyman have been fine as well. Maude for Tolstoy, and P&V for Gogol - one of the few instances I've encountered where P&V works well.
>>7572377
maybe
>>7572377
nice quality so you can't go wrong there, but just do some research before buying a translation. example: don quixote from everyman's uses the motteux translation, which sucks.
>>7572521
brothers karamazov from everymans library uses the pevear/volokhonsky translation so you are good on that one.
>>7572642
>pevear/volokhonsky translation so you are good on that one.
i dont have a problem with it personally but thats a somewhat controversial stance these days.
i dont think it matters much desu but meh.
All the Everyman's Dostoevsky books are P&V.
They're part of the same company as Knopf, P&V's publisher.
>>7572649
ah really? another translation is gaining popularity?
>>7573395
>P&V
Popular =/= good
Good translations of The Brothers Karamazov:
* David Magarshack (1958)
* Andrew MacAndrew (1970)
* Ralph Matlaw (rev. Garnett; 1976)
* Ignat Avsey (1994)
* David McDuff (2003)
>>7573449
popular =\= bad
p&v is still by far the best
Lol there were literally two contrarian articles - one barely long enough to be called an article - that came after a deluge of decades-long praise for p&v and now /lit/ acts like they're shit translators.
>>7573504
probably less than 3 people here have even read karamazov more than once in different translations let alone with regards to comparing them. and none of them probably even speak russian. the anti pv jerk right now is hilariously cringe.
>>7573504
I've never really liked them -- they're not bad at all, but I find them a bit awkward; of course, it is best to read excerpts and make your own opinion -- rather than parrot /lit/
It all started after they made mad buck on war & peace (it sold a ludicrous amount)
>>7573464
>p&v is still by far the best
That's an extraordinary claim. Why do you think so, exactly?
I don't have confidence in their method. It's implied as being twice as good, but really the two of them, along with their respective non-fluencies (her English, his Russian), present twice as much opportunity for translational error. One significant example is how their translation of Notes from Underground presents the pathology of the Underground Man in a spiritual framework instead of a social/psychological one.
>>7573511
Not the same guy, but
I've read translations by magarshack, mcduff, avsey, Garnett, p&v and Ready. Some books in more than one translation.
P&V is as good as any imo.
For 90%+ of people, if you read any of the translators I mentioned you will be fine. There is not that much of a difference (the obvious exception being wicked/spiteful in notes).
>>7573464
No way hozey
They're not bad, but you can't bluff the McDuff
>>7573576
>hozey
>>7573618
I dunno how to spell it :p xD
>>7573824
It's spelled Jose, in case you're serious.
But you should build on hozey instead by saying No Way Brozay next time and see where it goes.
