 |
GetTextbooks.co.uk
Compare Prices & Save up to 90% |
|
|
|
| Login | Sign up | My Wish List |
 | | The Norton Anthology of English Literature, Vol. 1 by M. H. Abrams (Editor) ISBN-10: 0393962873 ISBN-10: 0-393-96287-3 ISBN-13: 9780393962871 ISBN-13: 978-0-393-96287-1 Hardcover 1993-04 W W Norton & Co Inc Find Lowest Price |
Editorials | ||
Book Description The Sixth Edition of The Norton Anthology of English Literature continues to be the indispensable anthology. Like its predecessors, the Sixth Edition offers the best in English literature from the classic to the contemporary in a readable, teachable format. More selections by women and twentieth-century writers, a richer offering of contextual writings, apparatus fully revised to reflect today's scholarship, and a new larger trim size make the Sixth Edition the choice for breadth, depth, and quality. The Editors | ||
Reviews | ||
The heart of English Literature In graduate school I read and reread this work, studied and re- studied it. As it contains many the major masterpieces ( or excerpts of them) of English Literature it is a work which lends itself to this kind of reading and rereading. The introductions to each individual writer are also informative and in many cases a help in reading the work. It is probably still the best one- volume introduction to English Literature that there is. | ||
The Norton: What We Say About It Says More About Us As an undergraduate, I used to think that the canon of English literature was as fixed as were the stars tacked onto the heavens. Now as a professor myself, I realize that the stars above truly rotate, often in wild, unpredictable ways. If any reviewer wishes to review the latest edition of the NORTON ANTHOLOGY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE, that reviewer would find it wise to compare the evolution of the series from the first edition to the last. What changes have the editors wrought over the decades? What conclusions can anyone draw from these changes? Now these are weighty questions indeed, and there may be no adequate reply readily available. But I shall start with the obvious. (a) For whom is the Norton intended? Clearly the primary target audience is the undergraduate taking a two semester course in Masterpieces of English Literature. A secondary target would be those seeking to prepare for the GRE in English Literature. I think we can discount the second as a concern for the editors. Now who are the authors most likely to be analyzed in a one or two semester course, given the time limitations of a typical 15 meeting schedule? Some authors and works should be a given: Beowulf, Chaucer, More, Sidney, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Raleigh, Donne, Jonson, Marvell, Milton, Bacon, Hobbes, Butler, Dryden, Swift, Pope, Gray, Johnson, Boswell. That's quite a mouthful to digest in one semester. And look whom I have omitted: the Gawain poet, Everyman, Hooker, Wyatt & Surrey, Spenser, Skelton, Campion, Herrick, Herbert, Vaughn, Suckling, Burton, Bunyan, Defoe, Addison & Steele, Goldsmith. I defy any teacher to cover in any meaningful way even a smattering of the given, let alone the omitted. The question boils down to numbers, which in turn boil down to the ever shifting winds of literary political correctness. I can sense a change in the way this wind blows as I peruse the evolution of the Norton. Authors come and authors go, but bulk numbers remain. It is almost as if the editors wish to justify the inflated retail price by cramming in nearly 2,000 pages of literature, knowing full well that the vast majority of works and authors included will almost certainly never be used. And this brings me to (b). How to make the book more user friendly? There are some things the editors are doing right. I like the extended discussions of each period. These historical analyses are not mere digressions; they are needed to place the literature of that era in context, and the failure of the reader to do so will merely convince him that literature is not much different from science: a bunch of works, unconnected to anything. I also like the brief introductions to the various authors; they too are instructive. What I suggest now is something that is so commonsensical that I am sure it will never come to light. Back in high school, my lit texts were written as a sort of junior version of the Norton, and I do not use 'junior' as a pejorative. These high school texts were uncluttered with the notion that text should not have response to text. As I reread my high school texts, I am often amazed at the thoughtful questions and guides that followed each selection. Apparently, the Norton editors do not allow for undergraduates to have a guide of some sort. Well, I suggest that much of the twin Nortons can be safely cut down by a judicious excising of, let's face it, unread authors of interest only to old fogies like me. Why not replace these authors with questions, guides, topics to pursue, just the sort of things that come in handy in really getting at the core meaning of literature? The answer, of course, is that for the editors to do what I suggest would require them to relearn the basic fears and inadequacies that they probably felt as unlearned undergraduates when they first realized that the literary stars in the sky are not fixed at all, but depend for their meaning on the trickiest of all props: human variability of opinion. Since that is not going to happen, I fear that all future generations of students will have to groan under the weighty mass of bulk pages and undigested ideas. | ||
A great reference book for the literature enthusiast If you like classical English literature, you'll love this collection of poetry, fictional prose, and nonfictional prose all scribed by authors from that grand old island we call Great Britain. I used it as a text book, but I can see why people would want it on their shelves to take out and occasionally peruse. It's great for those times when you feel as though you've had enough of modern authors and reruns of Hill Street Blues. It's also a great conversation piece. I can imagine a couple inviting their close friends over and, having nothing else about which they may talk, mentioning the gigantic collection of literature this couple owns and currently displays proudly on their coffee table. My views are that such a book shouldn't go unnoticed by passers-by in the local bookstore. It's great to have this in your collection of masterpiece literature. When you run out of sappy romance novels, pick this up and start from "Beowulf" and finish with a little Joseph Conrad. You'll finish it in no time. So, give me a call in my corner of Louisiana when you're done... if you're still alive. | ||
Should this book exist? My main problem with this edition is some works are hopelessly butchered. Some examples: Gulliver's Travels had some of it's most hilarious (and offensive) passages omitted. The Canterbury Tales section, in my opinion, was badly lacking *yes I know how huge is it*. Sir Philip Sidney's Astrophil and Stella Sonnets would have sonnets 34,37, 39... why not humor us and add the few missing lines and complete it? I agree that the book is a very ambitious attempt to outline a lot, in which it arguable succeeds. However, I don't think any one who has read it would dispute that it does succeed in bastardizing many. Also, I find this anthology to be particularly susceptible to current and fashionable political agendas. By all means the books needs, say Marie de France, but if you approach this collection with an egalitarian outlook and start adding writers based almost entirely on their gender (or race) it will only discredit it. Why did the editors chose the omissions they did? To answer that I would need to delve deeply into the complex psyche of a literary scholar. So now for your enjoyment and enlightenment. I offer you an unprecedented and brilliant evaluation of a common(not universal) Literature Professor. Enter the Young Professor... You studied literature at a prestigious, preferably ivy league school (on someone else's wallet) with the solitary and admirable goal to someday create great Literature. However, after countless setbacks suffered at the hands of idolized, yet bitterly jealous professors, you learn the system, calm your ambitions and conform. And then one day, you realize you're a sour failure of an associate professor. But the noble dream is still not dead, so you toil late nights at the keyboard trying to produce your dream. Even with your finished work, you are too terrified of being discredited and mocked by your peers, also you come to the realization that your work will never compete with those you criticize and decide such a station is beneath you. Therefore, you change your direction. Now your sole purpose is to A) foist your perceived valuable mastery and worth B) disgrace yourself and the great writers of the western world by "editing", further ensuring fewer people are attracted to your Bastion of literary status. So you now spend your days writing beauracracies of context, style and format as a MLA fascist. Also in your freetime you enjoy belittling and crushing creativity displayed by potential usurpers and exposers with the following grading system. Ground breaking, insightful, dangerously original... with a misused semi-colon - C...- Reassuring regurgitation of my own recycled (yet probably asinine) ideas, conforming to all trivial literary conventions that necessitate my existence - ... B+ And there you have it! Academian mind explained. These editors, who are so confident that they are more knowledgeable in the author's intent, than oh-say, The Author! This is precisely the reason why editors of don't feel the slightest remorse at their selections and omissions, their knowledge truly is supreme. So get this book if you are forced to (like me), but buy a used, old edition for no reason other than to anger whiny professors. Then, see what you like and go find a version that has not been butchered by over zealous literary parasites. It really isn't that bad, but many of the works are dissected by people who should know enough not to do just that . I give it a a solid C... or on second thought, a C-, 72%. | ||
Needs better editing It seems to me that Norton can put together the best overview anthology around, but they can't bear to let anything go. All the major authors of the period are covered, but only one question: was the entirety of Paradise Lost really needed, and if it was, couldn't Beggar's Opera have been held off. All the right materials are there, but what is needed is some judicious editing. | ||