Publisher Series of Annotated Classics and Combinations
CharlasCombiners!
Únete a LibraryThing para publicar.
1chwiggy
I'm currently working on the Suhrkamp-Basisbibliothek Series, and I've noticed that for most books the annotated Suhrkamp Basisbibliothek editions are just combined with the main book, but for some, they are separated out and linked with the text they contain by work relationship and I'm yearning for some consistency. But I'm unsure if separating the SBB books out from like hundred of pretty popular works with a lot of editions is the right thing to do or how much of that separation is even justified (especially as in my own library I treat lightly annotated books like these just the same way I would a non annotated version).
Links to Publisher Series: https://www.librarything.com/nseries/257325/Suhrkamp-BasisBibliothek
And the three books where the annotated edition is separate from the classic without annotation:
https://www.librarything.com/work/24105733
https://www.librarything.com/work/24103044
https://www.librarything.com/work/24102955
Links to Publisher Series: https://www.librarything.com/nseries/257325/Suhrkamp-BasisBibliothek
And the three books where the annotated edition is separate from the classic without annotation:
https://www.librarything.com/work/24105733
https://www.librarything.com/work/24103044
https://www.librarything.com/work/24102955
2MarthaJeanne
I just took the canonical titles and original titles out of them. The canonical title should be 'in the language of the site you are on', and starting the title with the series information is not proper.
The work relationships are weird. Two say 'Is a student's study guide to', the other 'Contains'. Study guide is not right - Cliff's notes do not include the work itself.
The one I could see a table of contents on, a third of the book was commentary. That would be enough to separate, I think.
The work relationships are weird. Two say 'Is a student's study guide to', the other 'Contains'. Study guide is not right - Cliff's notes do not include the work itself.
The one I could see a table of contents on, a third of the book was commentary. That would be enough to separate, I think.
3spiphany
I have a couple of these editions, and I agree that separation would be justfied simply based on the amount of supplementary material (1/3 to 1/2 the volume). I also agree that there doesn't seem to be a suitable work-work relationship option for this.
There are probably lots of reasons why the books haven't been separated out consistently. One of which is that most combiners probably aren't familiar with the series and don't realize that these editions contain substantially more than just the work. So they only get separated in individual cases when a user finds it important for their edition to be distinguished from the main work.
I'll admit that this is not a case where it is important to me personally that the titles be separated out. I don't know if there is a significant social difference (i.e. how many people buy these editions specifically because of the supplementary material, and how many buy them mostly for the work and the supplementary material is largely irrelevant).
For what it's worth, the major series of critical editions of Shakespeare that are meant for a similar audience of high school/university students (e.g. Folger) have consistently NOT been separated, even though the ratio of text to supplementary material is often similar (and even though, in my experience, commentary/notes are more essential for understanding Shakespeare than for the German classics in the Suhrkamp series).
There are probably lots of reasons why the books haven't been separated out consistently. One of which is that most combiners probably aren't familiar with the series and don't realize that these editions contain substantially more than just the work. So they only get separated in individual cases when a user finds it important for their edition to be distinguished from the main work.
I'll admit that this is not a case where it is important to me personally that the titles be separated out. I don't know if there is a significant social difference (i.e. how many people buy these editions specifically because of the supplementary material, and how many buy them mostly for the work and the supplementary material is largely irrelevant).
For what it's worth, the major series of critical editions of Shakespeare that are meant for a similar audience of high school/university students (e.g. Folger) have consistently NOT been separated, even though the ratio of text to supplementary material is often similar (and even though, in my experience, commentary/notes are more essential for understanding Shakespeare than for the German classics in the Suhrkamp series).
4chwiggy
Like I personally would prefer to not have them all separated, but that might be about my particular use case so I didn't want to be the judge of it.
How much commentary there is, depends a lot on the work, some are indeed in the range of 1/2 or 1/3 some especially editions of more contemporary works have thinner commentary sections more in the range of 1/5 or 1/6...
It's also just a lot of work to separate them out and recombine them into consistent blocks of the same annotated edition, especially without having them all at hand and having to go by publisher documentation.
How much commentary there is, depends a lot on the work, some are indeed in the range of 1/2 or 1/3 some especially editions of more contemporary works have thinner commentary sections more in the range of 1/5 or 1/6...
It's also just a lot of work to separate them out and recombine them into consistent blocks of the same annotated edition, especially without having them all at hand and having to go by publisher documentation.
5spiphany
Yeah, I don't know if it would be important enough to me either to separate them all out...
In case you don't know, if you access works via the combine/separate page (i.e., by adding them to the "workbench" on the right sidebar), you can separate out multiple editions at the same time and they're automatically grouped together in a new work. This somewhat reduces the tediousness of the separating/recombining process.
In case you don't know, if you access works via the combine/separate page (i.e., by adding them to the "workbench" on the right sidebar), you can separate out multiple editions at the same time and they're automatically grouped together in a new work. This somewhat reduces the tediousness of the separating/recombining process.
