1st ML, (was 1933 ML Top Ten Best Sellers)

Rob Perrilleon rperrilleon at hotmail.com
Mon Apr 28 14:21:23 EDT 2003

Ed's post raises a point that's been bugging me.  Collectability aside, are 
the editions used for ML texts considered to be of poor quality?  I've had a 
few comments from book dealers implying this.  In "Used & Rare," Nancy 
Goldstone calls the War & Peace translation "inferior," and Ed's post seems 
to indict EPFBTM.  At the same time, I remember an earlier post saying that 
the translation of Charterhouse of Parma was considered definitive.  What's 
the story?

Rob Perrilleon

>From: "Ed J. Lukanuski" <ejluk at ix.netcom.com>
>Reply-To: modlib at algol.owu.edu
>To: <modlib at algol.owu.edu>
>Subject: Re: 1st ML, (was 1933 ML Top Ten Best Sellers)
>Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 01:56:51 -0400
I was surprised that text was use since EPFBTM lacked as all ML's any notion 
as to the text authority. Perhaps the professor didn't think it important to 
have the authentic text or he knew few of us had the money to buy high 
quality editions of those writers.

The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  

More information about the ModLib mailing list