The Norton Anthology of English Literature, Sixth Edition, Vol. 2/Pride and Prejudice

Rating:
Summary: The Norton: What We Say About It Says More About Us
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: Solid
Review: I bought the Norton Anthology of English Literature, seventh edition, volume 1, for one of my core classes in my English lit major, and I've found it to be a very worthy addition to my literature collection. Heaney's verse translation of Beowulf(as compared to the prose translation of the 6th edition) is engaging and fun to read(not to mention wonderful poetry). Chaucer's Canterbury Tales appear in their original Middle English, while Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is translated into modern English. This edition contains samples of numerous authors up until the 18th century, and it's an excellent buy for a survey of English literature.

Rating:
Summary: A great anthology of English Literature
Review: I had to buy this book for two of my English Literature survey courses. I'm sure that most people who buy this volume do the same--they buy it because they have to. Still, it is an excellent volume and a very thorough survey of English Literature, from the middle ages on down to the nineteenth century.

Highlights from this volume include Seamus Heaney's exceptional translation of Beowulf (in its entirety), Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, many selections from the Canterbury Tales, lots of Shakespeare, and Milton's masterpiece Paradise Lost, reprinted in full.

As I said before, many who buy this volume will do so because they have to. Still, I think most people will find this anthology to be one they will not be selling back at the end of the semester. I know I'll definitely be keeping mine. This is a great place to start a study of English Literature.

Rating:
Summary: A great reference book for the literature enthusiast
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: thin paper makes this unreadable
Review: 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%.

Rating:
Summary: Panders to the Zietgeist
Review: Ninety-nine percent of the people who buy this book will have no choice; it will be the required text for an undergraduate survey of British literature. They should know that while this is in many respects a fine book, it is misleading. I will offer a couple of examples based on my own specialization, 19th century literature.

The two volumes offer 15 pages on Sir Walter Scott, that is, 1/400th of the whole anthology, or 1/200th of the second volume. Yet Scott is, arguably, the most influential writer in English for the 19th century. No Scott - - no historical novel - - no War and Peace. The volume's ill-treatment of Scott extends to the selection of Scott's prose, namely the first chapter of The Heart of Midlothian. The story proper does not begin till chapter 2. I would advise a reader new to Scott to skip Chapter 1. What about printing one of Scott's short stories instead, "The Highland Widow" or "The Two Drovers"? If an excerpt must be used, what about the climax of Redgauntlet, with the dismissal of Bonnie Prince Charlie?

The editors and/or publishers have prepared a book they think will _sell lots of copies_. Be warned that this has dictated some distortions. Giving three times the space to Mary Wollstonecraft as to Scott is an example. No doubt Wollstonecraft is important for understanding the currents of sensibility of the age and the voice that feminists did have; but then, where are the hymns of Charles Wesley, taken up by innumerable British people? You need to know something about them if you are to understand the period. Leaving them out really does the reader a disservice.

Users of this book get an anthology that subtly distorts one's picture of the eras through which the selections move. Good luck to its users.

Rating:
Summary: Norton Anthology of English Literature by Abrams et al.
Review: This is an excellent reference guide for the English Literature
of the 1600s and 1700s. There is an exhaustive coverage of
the following works:
o Caedmon's Hymn
o Beowulf
o Geoffrey Chaucer
o Middle Age Lyrics
o Sir Thomas Mallory
o Medieval Attitudes Toward Life on Earth
o Christopher Marlowe
o Sir Thomas Moore
o Shakespeare
o Sir Walter Ralegh
o John Donne
o Robert Herrick
o George Herbert
o John Milton
o Richard Lovelace
o Samuel Butler
o Jonathan Swift
o Alexander Pope
o Samuel Johnson
o James Boswell
o Restoration Literature of the 18th Century

Here is a paragraph from "The Wife of Bath's Tale":
"The wise astrologen daun Ptolomce,
That saith this proverbe in his Almageste:
' Of alle men his wisdom is the hyeste
That rekketh nat who hath the world in honde.
By this proverbe thou shalt understonde."

This work is perfect for majors of English literature and
college courses in literature. A beauty of the work is that
it is written in the original English dialect of the
centuries represented. Critiques of this work alone could
fill a dozen or so academic dissertations.

Rating:
Summary: Norton is still the best
Review: This second volume of the NAEL covers the expanse of the Romantic Period, the Victorian Age and the 20th Century (or Modern Period). While I did have to get this book for a survey course, I was pleasantly suprised at the vast range of work represented in the text.

Not only does the book include "Cannonical" writers but also more obscure writers that may not be as well known now but were popular during their timeframe. The text has an equal amount of work represented from both women and men and explains the viewpoint of each in relation to what was going on at the time. An example are the women Romantic writers; they viewed things differently than their male counterparts and therefore wrote about different things, had different styles of writing, etc.

Of course, as with all Norton books, there are bios of each author before their selections, introductions to each period, apendicies, bibliographies, essays and a section of goegraphic nomenclature. The book is well formated, foot-noted (not end-noted =)), and the selections are marvelous. Anyone well versed in English literature should have this book on their shelves.