Scan barcode
hippoponymous's review
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
3.5
lsparrow's review against another edition
3.0
i have been enjoying this series - revisiting classics and learning about ones I have not explored and the art work insipired by them. This was not as good as vol 1.
missbryden's review against another edition
2.0
I appreciate these visual adaptations being done, but for the most part I didn't care for the art, even though there was such a variety.
Jane Eyre (I liked the art better than most, and appreciated the artist Elizabeth Watasin's attempt at capturing the feelings of the excerpted chapter) and Frederick Douglass's "The Message from Mount Misery" (the art, by Seth Tobocman, really helped his speech come to life for me) stood out.
Jane Eyre (I liked the art better than most, and appreciated the artist Elizabeth Watasin's attempt at capturing the feelings of the excerpted chapter) and Frederick Douglass's "The Message from Mount Misery" (the art, by Seth Tobocman, really helped his speech come to life for me) stood out.
balletbookworm's review against another edition
5.0
Oh, man, so much good art. So much. Particular favorites are Pride and Prejudice, Moby-Dick, and the Jabberwocky.
jek44120's review against another edition
4.0
I didn't like this one as much as the others because in many cases the full text of a piece was included with one image. I prefer less text, lots of images.
andrea_c's review against another edition
4.0
One aspect of the first volume I loved was its global focus; the anthology managed to produce a collection that truly felt representative of the literary canon. Volume 2 disappoints in this respect, it is very much focused on western classics.
The diversity of contributors is still impressive, and there are some works I would love to see get full-book treatment (Huxley King's P&P illustrations at the top of that list, obvs). Fortunately my favourite pages did (Introducing me to Kish's work is pretty much what bumped this up to 4-stars):
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10859527-moby-dick-in-pictures
The diversity of contributors is still impressive, and there are some works I would love to see get full-book treatment (Huxley King's P&P illustrations at the top of that list, obvs). Fortunately my favourite pages did (Introducing me to Kish's work is pretty much what bumped this up to 4-stars):
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10859527-moby-dick-in-pictures
mattycakesbooks's review against another edition
4.0
Just as good as the last one. This covers probably my least favorite era in literature - the 18th and 19th centuries - but it still has a few really beautiful adaptations, notably Moby Dick and Huckleberry Finn.
A thought about the era: I recently read Jane Eyre and Les Miserables, two of the books adapted in this collection, and it's impossible to miss how much attention is given to minutia and detail, with Les Mis especially. My theory is that this was the first era where storytelling was dominated by the literate rather than the oral tradition. This isn't to say that there wasn't an oral tradition still, just that it was mostly overshadowed by actual books and the expansion of literacy. Books lend themselves to longer, more vivid description than we normally would hear in a spoken format, so the authors went somewhat insane with the concept and, like in the case of Hugo, wrote a hundred goddamn pages on sewers. I know that the story adapts itself to the format of the storytelling - look at television and movies - but it seems like there's always a period where people haven't quite gotten the hang of it. Film-makers eventually caught onto how to do it particularly well around the 70's and 80's, and television has just started creating brilliant works of art in the past ten years or so.
Anyway, that's probably an underdeveloped theory, but the basic point is that the literature in the 18th and early 19th century was long and windy and was begging for Twain and Hemingway to come and chop it into something short, direct, and incredible.
A thought about the era: I recently read Jane Eyre and Les Miserables, two of the books adapted in this collection, and it's impossible to miss how much attention is given to minutia and detail, with Les Mis especially. My theory is that this was the first era where storytelling was dominated by the literate rather than the oral tradition. This isn't to say that there wasn't an oral tradition still, just that it was mostly overshadowed by actual books and the expansion of literacy. Books lend themselves to longer, more vivid description than we normally would hear in a spoken format, so the authors went somewhat insane with the concept and, like in the case of Hugo, wrote a hundred goddamn pages on sewers. I know that the story adapts itself to the format of the storytelling - look at television and movies - but it seems like there's always a period where people haven't quite gotten the hang of it. Film-makers eventually caught onto how to do it particularly well around the 70's and 80's, and television has just started creating brilliant works of art in the past ten years or so.
Anyway, that's probably an underdeveloped theory, but the basic point is that the literature in the 18th and early 19th century was long and windy and was begging for Twain and Hemingway to come and chop it into something short, direct, and incredible.
wheresthebirds's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
thewalrus11's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
guinness74's review against another edition
3.0
I enjoyed this, much like I enjoy art museums. There's stuff I like, and there's stuff I don't like. This series (of which this is the first book I've read) is certainly an immense undertaking, and I would imagine that there are tons of literary gems that were passed over in the editing process. But, the heart of this project is the art associated with the literature. Most of it is great, a few were so-so, only a couple did I find not to my taste. Some are comic in form, others have their roots in art forms that you would typically see in a museum, and others are, in my opinion, groundbreaking in graphic art. If you enjoy literature, I recommend this as a new "look." If you're a graphic artist or a comic book aficionado, this is probably just your sort of thing.