As a rule, which is better, penguin classics or oxford world classics?

Oxford are better in my opinion. But they are both excellent publishers.

Look at each book in isolation -- some penguins are better than their oxford partners.

File: 1458899060506.jpg (137KB, 796x1244px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 796x1244px

Wordsworth

>>8083000
Generally, Oxford is better. But there are plenty of exceptions to that.

File: everyman.jpg (511KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 768x1024px

>>8083000
this

Cambridge's got the best Shakespeare though.

I sometimes prefer Penguin because their books usually have footnotes instead of endnotes like Oxford.

But if there aren't any differences like that, l'm honestly swayed by the cover. Both are equally good publishers.

>>8083000

As >>8083008 and >>8083294 have said, you cannot really compare series broadly in this way. Each has strong editions and translations, and each less strong. In specific cases, one or other will have a fuller publication (e. g., the Penguin volume of Lucian's Dialogues of the Courtesans is complete; the Oxford selections). Oxford seems slightly more inclined to publish prose translations of verse (e. g., Horace's Satires and Robin Hard's Eratosthenes et al.); however, in some cases this is in a version by an expert scholar (ML West's Hesiod, for instance).

Which to go with depends on the area of literature you are interested in, the specific works, and what your specific tastes and priorities are.

>>8083000
oxford and penguin for most translations
wordsworth for english shit (if they have it), otherwise vintage
hackett for some phil. translations

paper quality id say wordsworth (thick)>vintage (thick)>penguin>hackett>oxford>vintage (thin)>>>wordsworth (thin)

why the bigger wordsworth books have so much better paper idk

>>8083285
That's not how you say Arden, m8.

>>8083563

The old ones are old. And they are overdoing it on the third gen. Two volumes for Hamlet?!

>>8083559
I really don't like Penguin's paper. I'd say oxford is better, but every time I read Loeb I wish every book had paper like that.

File: 529f21dd90d4ff77f64675d972a16b3e.jpg (85KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 736x736px

>>8083282
i saw some everyman "pocket poets" series in a bookshop today. never seen them before. they are beautiful

>>8083282
>>8083669

They look pretty good, but how are the translations? Do they publish philosophy?

>>8083687
I think they do the odd pit of philosophy, but it's the classic stuff (Plato's Republic for an example)

The majority of their translations are good, and the paperquality/typesetting is great. The secondary material is good too, but not as good as Oxford's imo.

>>8083669

>they're beautiful
>cheap ass vectors on cover and spines

Please, develop your taste.

>>8083713
>inserts "ass" into sentences where it is redundant
>criticises others' taste

do behave anon

File: Silence-Shusaku-Endo.jpg (118KB, 1043x1600px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1043x1600px

>>8083729
I see that as perfectly acceptable noun to describe my feeling when I'm accounted by juveniles drooling over pool that's been pissed in. I've four of those vectors in my photoshop, and I'm only counting all of those crosses on Poe spine as one. That my friend is a cheap ass designing work done in thirty seconds with little to zero sense for design. Absolute travesty. Thinking it beautiful is as big one as well.

>>8083596
That's why they keep revising and changing on each series. That's a good thing. It reflects the development of literary analysis.

As for Hamlet, one is for the text of Q2 and the other one for Q1 and F. It's completely reasonable and pertinent.

>>8083800
why don't you write more about it, faggot

>>8083669
Just added a few to my bookdepository wishlist, the compilations is something I've been looking for.

Oxford World Classics is where it's at if you're buying the collected poems of whoever. Or Faber & Faber for more modern poetry (Well... Plath: if you buy Plath you buy Faber & Faber)

Oxford generally prints better, corrected editions of the texts whereas penguins are more aesthetically pleasing.

Oxfords look too much like language arts textbooks for my tastes.

>>8083817
Yes, you certainly are juvenile. No taste, and incapable to respond to little banter. Deplorable behaviour...

>>8083623
Oxford paper is too white. So not only do I get slightly triggered everytime I read those books, but I also get blinded by the reflection of light

>>8084008
Do you have autism