1Bibliophile-I
What do you think of the EL Jane Austen set versus that of other publishers? For example, Folio Society.
2cpg
>1 Bibliophile-I:
I read all but one of Austen's canonical books in the EL edition, and I remember quite liking them. No illustrations (I think) but attractive paper, clear printing, sewn-binding, convenient size, etc.
They were certainly not as fancy as the gold-colored FS edition that came out a decade ago. But my EL editions did seem nicer to me than some of the older FS editions I've seen on my neighbors' shelves. (But maybe they loved their copies to death.)
I read all but one of Austen's canonical books in the EL edition, and I remember quite liking them. No illustrations (I think) but attractive paper, clear printing, sewn-binding, convenient size, etc.
They were certainly not as fancy as the gold-colored FS edition that came out a decade ago. But my EL editions did seem nicer to me than some of the older FS editions I've seen on my neighbors' shelves. (But maybe they loved their copies to death.)
3bsc20
Yes, the Everyman's Austens are excellent. They are working, study-ready books, with introductions, chronologies, and so forth, but are also elegant and just the right trim size to be comfortable to use and unobtrusive on the shelf. Some of the FS books are way too bulky for comfort and meant to be eye-catching more than practical, it seems. Not sure if that applies to the Austens though.
Join to post
