What edition of Moby Dick does /lit/ prefer?

>>9665560
Leather bound gold trim
Cost 30$
Still haven't read

>>9665565
This post is the fucking epitome of /lit/. It should be made into a fucking banner.

File: Moby-Dick_Penguin.jpg (25KB, 320x429px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 320x429px

This one. The harsh orange spines and creamy covers of the old Penguin English Library editions take me back to when I was a kid picking them up for 25¢ at the library sale bin. It's also edited by Harold Beaver, and the same could be said of him as of the poor sub-sub: pocket-sized this may be, but of the 1015 pages of print 680 are taken up by the actual novel, and the rest are filled with every kind of encyclopedic, historical, contextual, hypothetical, fanciful and critical commentary to fill out 335 pages of tight-knit endnotes, making its shape closer to a Polaroid camera than a travel-friendly companion.

Other than that, anything edited by Hershel "Mr Melville" Parker or with the Northwestern Newberry seal of approval cannot steer you wrong. I really like the cover of the Library of America solo edition.

are footnotes absolutely necessary for Moby-Dick?

>>9665723
no, in fact I would say they are detrimental to the experience

>>9665689
This is literally an older version of the Norton edition, and the Norton edition is printed acid free and won't fall apart in 10 years or even 100.

Why even mention it if OP image supplants it?

nobel lecture edition

Better question, who did the best illustrations?
I vote Rockwell Kent

Whats the best translation of Moby Dick

File: 3556538-01.jpg (254KB, 914x1280px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 914x1280px

>>9666311

File: 2dbef980aa8c1b6fd8de440cd56ba28f.jpg (112KB, 450x675px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 450x675px

Please tell me yaou aren't even trying

File: 9781598530858 (2).jpg (59KB, 449x700px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 449x700px

>>9665880
Because he asked which we preferred, so it's a personal matter. The Norton is undeniably better quality, and the critical apparatus is a lot more efficient, but the Penguin shows me the passion and care that went into editing and annotating the beast; and that, far from their current bare bones approach to the classics, these mass market paperbacks used to be labors of scholarly love.

Pic related is the LoA solo paperback.

>>9665791
In what way?

>>9666533
Seconded.

>>9665560

I have this version, it's good if you rip out all the stuff written by the cuck editors and cross-out the footnotes.

>footnote explaining who Noah is.

Is it fine to read the everyman editions which has no notes if I haven't read all of the bible or shakes?

>>9665560
That one.

>>9667001
>haven't read all of the bible or shakes?
I bet you didn't start with the greeks either, fucking pleb.

>>9665689
T H I S
H
I
S

>>9665880
its not the same. look online and the consensus is that the beaver penguin version is the best.

>>9665723
i think theyre interesting but unnecessary

>>9666897
>>footnote explaining who Noah is.
wew
Are the critical essay at least interesting?

File: moby-dick-herman-melville-paperback-cover-art.jpg (12KB, 200x324px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 200x324px

Cheap, portable, and with decent critical essays. The notion that it would fall apart is preposterous. I've had mine for 6 years, read it 7 or 8 times and taken it to 4 different countries. If it ever did fall apart, I could buy an identical copy anywhere for less than a dollar.

>>9668898

No, full of fart-whiffing.

I'll put it to you this way the editor included 3 of his own "critical essays."

1949 Washington Square Press abridged version.

>>9668467
This right here
Anything else is only pretending

>>9665978
The only correct answer.

I've got this one
I'd binding isn't great but everything else is good (there are footnotes written by Ishmael every few chapters, right?)

File: c9241d1b07d53c18db730319dc254a6b.jpg (269KB, 855x1139px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 855x1139px

>>9670407
Forgot pic

>>9665560

The one that is read

>>9670412
>>9669301

Fellow lurkers, would you trust the judgment of an idiot who can't even remember to post a pic along with his message?

>>9670429
What are you on about?

>>9668467
hardcover or paperback

File: 51IN5Q4VLaL._SY346_.jpg (25KB, 215x346px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 215x346px

Bought this new for like 8 usd and thought it read great.

>>9668467
is the UCpress edition the exact same thing as the original arion press or didi they have to compress it?

>>9668467
overpriced bs
>>9665560
norton is always good, but anon this book is in english so it doesn't really matter. every version should have the same text

>>9672382
>every version should have the same text because it's English

What?

File: 20170223_225920.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

That's my favorite edition.

File: 91jvo46ohNL.jpg (948KB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 2560x1920px

Good edition

What do I buy???
Are footnotes good or bad???

File: 51oxII8vQTL._SX305_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (51KB, 307x499px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 307x499px

makes me rock hard every time

>page quality, dust cover, cover art all 10/10

File: moby-dick.jpg (29KB, 431x600px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 431x600px

Just got the Macmillian Collector's Library hardcover. How did I do?