Norton (and other) Critical Editions

I have been separating Norton Critical Editions from other copies of a particular work. Although I have not used the Nortons, they appear to me to include additional text, as for a study of the literary work, that would make the reading experience substantially different. However, I often find that someone has come along behind me and recombined. Anyone care to weigh in on this?

I don't usually combine annotated editions or anything else with significant text differences. People may be recombining because they don't realize they're special, or because they believe in combining similar editions for social reasons. (Or they could be weird. That clearly happens.)

A case can be made for combining the critical editions as socially equivalent. I think they're socially different, personally.

I've not touched the Nortons in particular, but, generally, I do combine 'Annotated' with regular editions. I know they contain additional material, but I fall to the social connection side more than the differing content side, up to a point. When the edition is more of a textbook treatment, as in the Norton Critical Editions and others like it, I'd then lean towards keeping them separate. Having said that, I don't mess with it if it's clearly been well organized either way. I try to put my combining/separating efforts into works that have been vandalized or are simply 'unkempt'.

My distinction regarding 'annotated' vs 'critial' or 'study' editions is somewhat a reflection of how I read such works. I like to find annotated editions of classics because they save me from flipping through the dictionary/encyclopedia/internet for archaic or unfamiliar references. I also enjoy the added context they offer. However, my goal is simply to enjoy the read, not an academic study of the work, author, historical impact, etc. Hence, I draw the line between annotated vs critical or study editions. Somewhat artificial, but the line must go somewhere.

O.

If the work has the text of the book, then (IMHO) it should be combined. Yes, the Norton Critical Editions have "extra" material included, but there are other editions that also have "extra" material... where are you going to stop?? Each edition of a work? Many of the entries do not have notations about extra material included... there is often no way to determine what is bound in a specific edition.

Also, using the "social context" criteria, the Norton Critical Editions should be combined with the "non-annotated" books.

It is the work you are combining, not the extras.

I agree with skittles. Many editions of classic novels will include endnotes that explain many of the allusions that depend, to some degree or another, on the time period in which the book was written. (Personally, I've encountered this with the Penguin Classics and Oxford World's Classics editions, but I haven't read a lot of fiction recently.)

I have a number of Norton critical editions from college, and I would prefer for them to be combined with the major work. I'd rather connect with the thousands of others who have Wuthering Heights than the twenty with the NCE.

I think that a better solution will come along eventually, when the part/whole issue is better addressed (for example, with short stories and such).

Another vote to combine them. I have several Norton critical editions, and they should be combined with the major work.

I also think they should be combined, for reasons similar to those mentioned above.

I'm fine with that, especially since we seem to be near a consensus. Besides, it's easier, with little social info lost, if any.

O.