Do you prefer Oxford or Penguin for classics?

depends entirely on the individual book

some of the penguin paperbacks look great, some of them look awful

I think the oxford classics have more hits than misses though

I prefer the Oxford Shakespeares
Idk why people bother with the Penguins

>>24575255
>>24575259
Which of them has more notes and the superior critical apparatus?

>>24575269
If you mean the Shakespeare editions than Oxford by far
I still think that Arden have better editions though

>>24575251 (OP)
Gutenberg is the best.

>>24575269
Probably Oxford.

>>24575292
>Hurdur an unasked for option
Every 4chan thread since the beginning of time...These publishers at least commission modern translations and add notes, chronology and essays, etc.,
Gutenberg is usually a messy text file with no wider context and no guarantee of being proofread.
Gutenberg is free and a worthy cause, but these publishers are at least trying to keep interest in the classics alive.

Penguin
>brown small spots on page
>more see-through pages

Oxford
>black ink spots, less than penguin at least
>less-see through

I like the dark covers on penguin but oxford is in other regards, better

>>24575251 (OP)
most of what I have is Penguins. but I do have an Oxford copy of Augustine's Confessions.

Something that's really frustrating is most of the time it doesn't matter the publishing house, some prints are just worse than others by mere chance.

It's like the silicon lottery with GPU's.

They are manufactured in a way that it's purely luck of the draw on whether you get a pristine print or a flimsy one.

For example I own many Oxford paperbacks. The copy I have of Phenomenology of Spirit is super nice, the paper is great quality, and the printing is very clear. But then I have a copy of the Divine Comedy which is really bog standard: the paper is thin, a lot of the printing is oversaturated, just not in top shape.

>>24575251 (OP)
>Liberia or Ghana

no niggers thank you

>>24575507
Just read their epubs

>>24575544
I care about physical media, I'm not a soulless consumer brained faggot.

>"why would you buy a book when you can read a PDF file?"

^ serious statement from a real human

>>24575552
I understand why people would prefer physical books, but your argument about not being a consumer doesn't make any sense, because you actually have to pay for those books and I don't.

>>24575269
Oxford often goes a bit overboard with the notes, introduction etc. I usually like a small introduction to get familiar with the work and the author, but Oxford often has more notes and longer introductions than the actual text itself.

>>24575251 (OP)
>>24575255
I’m autistic enough that covers matter to me, and unfortunately the Oxford covers are frequently horrible. Look at picrel for Tolstoy’s Resurrection. You think I want that ugly bitch in my library? She looks like spilled macaroni that grew human characteristics.
Also, the Oxford print can smear with humidity very easily. For most that might not be a problem, but living in south Florida and reading outside, I end up with black all over my hands and the pages illegible. That’s a surprising cheapness for prestige paperbacks. Don’t have that problem with Penguin. And the Penguin pages just feel and look better, creamier and bookier.
In general Penguin seems studier, more thought-out and better made. That said I don’t often quibble between the two beyond questions like this, if Oxford has the book I want in a nice edition I don’t think too much about buying it. If I had to choose between one or the other existing however, Penguin without question.

>>24575623
>I’m autistic enough that covers matter to me

That not autistic at all bro. Covers are very important, they set the tone for the book.

People who claim that covers don't matter must have some weird sensory limitation where aesthetics have zero effect on them.

>>24575630
I just got really mad when all the covers on my Kindle vanished

>>24575623
What about these?

>>24575633
ugly, purple background doesn't fit red writing

>>24575633
Gross.

Looks like a pattern you'd find on your grandma's oven mitts.

>>24575633
>The DEI witch

>>24575623
>>24575630
how plebeian and coomer brained does one have to be to think that a 19 century master painting by what looks like Zorn is an ugly book cover?

>>24575653
I actually didn't say anything about that specific cover. I just said that covers matter.

>>24575633
This is whatever for me, I don’t love it and I don’t hate it. It does feel like it’s trying to do too much though. Penguin covers just feel effortlessly superior.

>>24575658
>You think I want that ugly bitch in my library? She looks like spilled macaroni that grew human characteristics.

>>24575660
That wasn't me, that was the guy I replied to.

Are you having a stroke?