<< 1 >>
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10911/10911432439c1322df126b9387cb51b9bd272377" alt="5 stars" Summary: traditional symbols Review: I have alot of books on symbols and this is one of those favourites,easy to read and comprehend,great research tool. Lots of illustrations,along with references to art and literature and religion with a modern bent.Slighty euro centric and I do prefer books that rely on ancient definitions or the pyschology of symbols.Still This book is a worthwhile and an invaluable addition to your reference library.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: Infatuated with Universals Review: I would call this dictionary an average reference book. It contains pictures to keep the graphically inclined happy. The marginalia directing readers to related topics is helpful. The longer articles giving more general descriptions are fun to read. On the other hand, Tressider seems to try too hard to come up with universal meanings for the symbols he describes, pointing out the common elements while ignoring instances where a symbol may have radically different meaning. His articles are often short and incomplete. This is not as comprehensive a book as Chevalier's Dictionary of Symbolism (which I would recommend for the serious student of art and literature over this one), but many readers will find it's clean format and short explanations entertaining and attractive. It deserves to be part of a library of symbolism, but I would not make it my only source.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: Infatuated with Universals Review: I would call this dictionary an average reference book. It contains pictures to keep the graphically inclined happy. The marginalia directing readers to related topics is helpful. The longer articles giving more general descriptions are fun to read. On the other hand, Tressider seems to try too hard to come up with universal meanings for the symbols he describes, pointing out the common elements while ignoring instances where a symbol may have radically different meaning. His articles are often short and incomplete. This is not as comprehensive a book as Chevalier's Dictionary of Symbolism (which I would recommend for the serious student of art and literature over this one), but many readers will find it's clean format and short explanations entertaining and attractive. It deserves to be part of a library of symbolism, but I would not make it my only source.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4286/c4286d28ba026fc2ee53b3aeb4c0d32e0527fd1c" alt="4 stars" Summary: fun book Review: one of my favorites on symbols. Not exactly encyclopedic, but extremely palatable, useful and written in a fun style.Very cool.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dae3c/dae3c7fd7de59568b3091e83eae9660af0b48a4b" alt="3 stars" Summary: not enough Review: This book has a lot of useful information, but a lot of it is general. First of all, this book is supposed to be illustrated - and it is to an extent, small blue line drawings or several icons/symbols, but I expected more. Also I found that a lot of the explanations of symbols were not complete, or fully explained. Not only that, but there is a lot of symbolism left out. Several times, I have gone to look up an item in the book and it wasnt even there, I feel like there wasnt enough research done in the production. (but then again, to have a more complete book of symbols, you would need a VERY LARGE BOOK, and this book is tiny.) Good for quick general referances, but not good detailed information about the different interpretations of symbols.
<< 1 >>
|