I was a bit confused when I got this book. The front cover was a nice quality with an interesting image and color scheme (I'll forgive the Times New Roman font). I opened it up and found what seems to be a printed, bound Word document with Track Changes enabled. Now, I have nothing against this program or feature. It's just that it seems a middle stage in the project, not a final product. Since this is my first ER book that I have ever actually received (though I fall for ablachly's literary come-ons EVERY SINGLE MONTH since I have been a member), I wondered whether ER books are final products or just drafts to test the potential audience and get feedback. That would make sense. But no, I started to realize as I read the back cover, the Bruces intended their work to be annotations to a manuscript of Robinson Crusoe. This is an end, it seems, not a middle point to the project. Maybe someone could use this for a bigger, more academic project on Defoe. It's probably not something I'd look at for more than a minute or two in a bookstore, though. ( )

The editors briefly state that Defoe's Robinson Crusoe was inspired by Alexander Selkirk's account of his experience as a castaway. They then reproduce the complete text of Defoe's work, with a handful of footnotes referring to Selkirk's.

A great disappointment: all we get of Selkirk are a few shreds. Even if his writing (or ghostwriting) is of low quality, I'm sure those interested in Crusoe could slog through excerpts.

It's odd. The editors have read Selkirk, why won't they let us read him?

This book was created by what I would call a "professional amateur", someone who does something for a hobby, for the love of it. It appears to be something of an experiment and learning experience for the husband and wife Bruce team on a number of fronts: annotating, graphic design, literary history, print on demand publishing. As someone who has tried to print my own book, and also annotated classic literature (online), I realize how rare it is for all these skills to exist in the same person at a professional level, and so I give the Bruce's credit for coming out with something that, while not university press quality, is certainly acceptable and "not bad". Annotating really is a lot of fun and each person can create a different annotation as unique as the annotator.

As for the content, Bruce set out to show the connections between the fictional Robinson and the real-life person he was based on, Alexander Selkirk. This is of course interesting although seems sort of shallow. Normally this type of thing would be done by academics using rigorous techniques based on authoritative copies of the text and with a major university press and PhD behind it to give it credibility for future scholars who wish to cite it. Rather what we have here reminds me of the Victorian era gentleman scholar/traveler/scientist - sadly those days are over for better or worse. ( )

While this was a decent rendition of Robinson Crusoe and I did learn some about Selkirk, the sparse annotations were lacking. There were relatively few of them, scattered throughout the novel, and many repeated earlier content (rats, dancing, master of the domain). I was expecting something with more content, such as Martin Gardner's The Annotated Alice in Wonderland, Douglas A. Anderson's The Annotated Hobbit, or the Whole Story edition of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. The essays about the authors' travels to Selkirk's beginnings were quite interesting; I was just hoping for more of the same. I would have also preferred a smaller edition that was easier to hold, but that's nitpicking even more. ( )

The book purports to be "dual autobiography" of both Robinson Crusoe and Alexander Selkirk, the man on whom Crusoe was modelled. I would have been much happier with the book if that were what it contained. Unfortunately, the editors haven't quite delivered on that subtitle's promise.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the format of the work because therein lies the rub. It is a Print on Demand (PoD) book done, I believe, by Lulu, in 8.5" x 11" format. That's fine, it's physically nice, but the book was laid out using Microsoft Word. The book contains a copy of Robinson Crusoe dropped into Word with relatively sparse sidebar comments describing the parallels and differences between Crusoe's and Selkirk's exploits. The editors' annotations are done using Word's comment feature, with sidebar call-outs. I cannot begin to describe how unprofessional this appears in print. These annotations would have been *much better* presented in its own chapter, with a coherent biographical essay. The introduction would have been the perfect location for this essay. As is, there is little value added. The editors' introduction is perhaps a third of a page (the "About the Author" section is longer). The concluding chapter (also relatively brief, and includes some grainy black and white photos) describes the editors' research efforts to explore Alexander Selkirk's life and adventures.

Unfortunately, I don't feel this edition adds a great deal to the original "Robinson Crusoe," and it pains me to say that because it was so obviously a labor of love for the editors/annotators, but the book was, for me, a missed opportunity.

Review copyright 2008 J. Andrew Byers ( )