Which edition do you own, /lit/? I know there's controversy.

>>9692224

File: 511kAOSUW0L._SX325_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (33KB, 327x499px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 327x499px

>>9692224
The only controversy is the original british vs original american.

Pingwing Classic

File: IMG_2673.jpg (165KB, 570x614px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 570x614px

>>9692226
Whoops I forgot

>>9692230
well it's an american novel so..

>>9692224
Anybody know about this edition? Is it any good?

>>9692237
the original british version included the end where Ishmael was rescued. The original american did not. So there was a huge gulf in critical reception

>>9692237
Well irrc the British version is the one that had the epilogue, so you should probably go with that version

File: 51iaNFBdS+L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (33KB, 227x346px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 227x346px

>>9692224
This one.

some old Library of America Yale edition from the early 60s with copious footnotes from the time right before literary criticism went full retard

feels based

there's about 1-2 footnotes per page, don't know how footnotelets even read moby-dick

>>9692250
So you're saying footnotes are good? I've heard so many people say they aren't even necessary for Moby Dick, I honestly don't know what to think now.

File: IMG_2675.jpg (36KB, 243x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 243x400px

>>9692254
Would also like to know about the footnotes desu

>>9692254
I always like footnotes but I find these are especially great. Like I said, it's from that time before critical theory took off, so there's no bullshit queer theory junk in the footnotes. They just want to teach and inform the reader well.

The edition is actually called The Library of Literature with notes by some Yale prof.

>>9692243
>>9692241
epilogue ruins the story

>>9692272
Someone had to live to tell the story anon

>>9692273
yes and he lived after that, but we don't need to hear all about it. it's a novel, we can figure it out.

The first American edition is the standard for the American novel.

File: IMAG0593.jpg (1MB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1520x2688px

>>9692250
This one? If so, I agree it's great. I have 3 and this one is my favorite.

File: IMAG0594.jpg (1MB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1520x2688px

>>9692282
Couple of the pics inside

File: mobydick.jpg (157KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 960x960px

I've got this edition (Random House, 1930). No idea how it holds up but the pictures and print are quite pretty.

>>9692224
>>9692232
>>9692246
>>9692292
why dies wales aint white niqqa

>>9692239
Oxford classics are usually a safe bet. I read the Franklin Library and it had really some really nice prints of period whaling paintings and was overall top quality.

>>9692224
As long as it's not abridged it doesn't matter too much

File: moby1.jpg (333KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 1200x1600px

>>9692224

>>9692241
>>9692243

You have it precisely backwards. The British version lacked the epilogue which led them to think it was retarded. Literally 5 seconds on wikipedia would have told you this.

Also the British version was censored and had a lot of fag stuff and shots at royalty taken out.

>>9692668
that's because Americans are always better

>>9692668
>5 seconds on wikipedia
I would rather be incorrect on a badly remembered obscure fact in a field that is not my own than be a wikipedia scholar.

>>9692681
apparently you'd rather be hyperbolic than say anything of substance as well.

File: 520855.jpg (30KB, 318x500px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 318x500px

It was cheaper than the other editions but it also isn't a pleb tier mass market paperback

It also has a cute portrait of Melville on the inside of the front cover which is kinda cool.

>>9692701

Looks girly
Not a good look for one of the most masculine books ever

>>9692711
Melville was pretty clear that he didn't want any of the covers to have a whale depicted (since its an allegory), so the only acceptable cover itt is the orange one.

>>9692224
But the real question is boys: which version is the best?

>>9692701
Content is great, I have this too. However the quality of the cover sucks, it is falling to bits and I have only read once. Going to buy a more expensive edition at some point, as this one will not last.

>>9692224

Well, was it worth it? I saw you today. A ruined woman. Ruined. You looked devastated. The best part? You did it to yourself.

Worth it?

>>9692282
yes, my man

its a great edition

>>9692291
do not all editions have the illustrations?

File: IMG_2676.jpg (59KB, 334x500px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 334x500px

Is this one good?
>>9692224
>>9692230
Does the Oxford contain the British publication...? If so, is this a bad thing?

>>9692282
I have this one too. A gift from my uncle. some of the notes are a little spergy but I'd say the majority of them were helpful.

>>9692864
Do you post here often? I swear I can recognize you by your posts.

I only use the ultra-rare first edition when it was called "Muh Dick."

File: dick.png (532KB, 386x672px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 386x672px

the cheapest I could find

>>9692282
Which three? Rank

I did some searching and stumbled upon this: https://www.quora.com/What-version-of-Moby-Dick-contains-the-original-illustration-and-book-design

The guy mentions faulty quotation marks in the Norton Critical Edition. Unfortunately the link to his blog he provides no longer works.
Anyone know what's up with that?

>>9693361

its fucking hideous

>>9693576
>https://www.quora.com/What-version-of-Moby-Dick-contains-the-original-illustration-and-book-design


And yet, it's only one little mistake that can be corrected rather easily. Norton will release a third edition pretty soon anyway, so let's hope they change that there.

File: lot-of-3-herman-melville-typee-moby-dick-billy-budd-library-of-america-42875ace5b0a66875e906d7717ce8209.jpg (21KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x375px

>>9692224
Library of America ftw

>>9692224
>>9693139
Anyone know about these ones?

>>9693445
haven't heard much on this one
>>9693139
that one is shit

>>9693986
meant to reverse what I said. The UCpress is shit and way to large with fancy illustrations the make the book more entertaining for children. I don't know about the penguin deluxe

File: Moby-Dick_Penguin.jpg (16KB, 239x320px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 239x320px

>>9692259
Does anybody know if the edition mentioned here contains the same footnotes as the one in >pic related

I don't really no for sure. Can anyone who owns the bantam classics one confirm?

I got the loa paperback cause I didn't want a whale on the cover

>>9693737
Are those all yours? Do they read well?

File: 41WL9-IoRGL._SY346_.jpg (20KB, 221x346px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 221x346px

Is this version good? It has the epilogue. I know that the cover is bad btw.

>>9694044
You're high as hell.

>>9694147
The Bantam does not include Harold Beaver's copious notes, but it does have a couple of essays in the back. I can't attest to their quality or usefulness since I only saw it in a sale bin (I didn't get it because the cover was almost falling off the hinges).

File: cover-nce-md-2002.jpg (382KB, 1149x1838px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1149x1838px

I've always hated that Norton's Critical Editions do footnotes instead of endnotes. Really throws off the pacing.

File: cb446ca91951d3d468e39f827bbbc4ec--penguin-classics-moby-dick.jpg (80KB, 736x1078px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 736x1078px

>>9692224
I like the Penguin Classics cloth cover series

File: bn.jpg (593KB, 1000x832px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 1000x832px

>>9692224

>>9694742
endnotes are fucking disgusting

footnotes all the way

I have the Norton Critical and the Arion Press facsimile hardcover.

>>9692292
Nice. This is the GOAT version imo.

>>9692728
This. Pls respect Melville's wishes

>>9694488
I have that one and it's fine bro and cheap af

File: IMG_2678.jpg (72KB, 449x700px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 449x700px

This one is fantastic. N-N text, built well, great font, and easy to transport. A great durable read.

>>9694847
Not to be that senpai, but that series is very unaesthetic.

>>9692292
>>9695632
only good answers itt

>>9693445
This is the edition I intend on purchasing

>>9695643
Actually if Melville didn't want a fucking whale on the cover they would be:
>>9692259
>>9692282
>>9693737
>>9694147
>>9694742
>>9695632

>>9695632
Have this one and it's pretty good so far

>>9692224
that one and a penguin one

File: IMG_2679.jpg (286KB, 597x843px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 597x843px

great for bus rides

>>9695638
It's very hit and miss

>>9695632
this one

>>9695700
>commentary by Harold B-


almost

>>9694975
How is this edition?

File: Moby_Dick.jpg (21KB, 289x460px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 289x460px

I bought this copy a couple of years ago. It only has a couple footnotes, but too cheap to buy a different ond

>>9695638
Some covers like Paradise Lost are good

File: IMG_2680.jpg (35KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x282px

Guys, which edition is undoubtedly the most patrician one to buy? I want a text where I can enjoy the reading experience throughout the entire book (this doesn't necessarily mean footnotes, but possibly) Basically, if I want to read Moby Dick right, what should I choose?

>>9695736
For footnotes, go for the orange Feidelson Jr edit or the Harold Beaver edit (good look finding either of those though) the Feidelson with the ghost ship on isn't very durable. If you don't want footnotes, go with penguin deluxe or library of America solo. These should have endnotes.

>>9692246
ditto

but it has been ruined by a certain young child

wanna FUGG?