ok, so I've being digging through the archive for hours

>>9155336
I bought the Everyman's Library version, but I'm not an expert so take w/ pinch of salt

Remember man: it was written in English, so the edition is mostly an aesthetic choice, considering you don't have to worry about translation.

>>9155341
I saw someone calling the Everyman's version "more definitive", so it's one of the ones I'm considering. Does it have annotations/explanations?

>>9155359
No not really

You'd need to buy a separate book of annotations

But it does have Joyce's chapter schema, which is very interesting, though, like Eliot's notes on the Waste Land, possibly tongue-in-cheek.

>I know for sure is that Gabler is shit
congrats on being wrong

>>9155529
A lot of people were claiming he takes way more liberties than he should, isn't that the case?

>>9155336
>Gabler is shit and that I should look for a 1961 edition
This is correct.

>>9155341
There's actually a drastic difference between Gabler and the other editions. He claimed to fix thousands of errors. In reality, there were a few dozen errors and he made thousands of unwarranted changes. Joyce proofed the first edition, there's no reason to resort to the several incompatible manuscripts and mash them together.

>>9155585
This. The 1961 edition is the DEFINITIVE edition.

Differences among the various prints: the original 1922 edition had a ton of typographical errors, so subsequent editions tried to fix them, but many, and especially Gabler's edition introduced a ton of new ones. Though the fact stands, each and every edition of Ulysses has it's own unique convolutions and some are much worse than others.

Source: https://infinitezombies.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/which-edition-of-ulysses-is-best/

>>9156424
https://www.amazon.com/Ulysses-Complete-Unabridged-corrected-reset/dp/B002L0JHXI ?