Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.
Cargando... The Cambridge Guide to Literature in English (1988)por Ian Ousby
Ninguno Cargando...
Inscríbete en LibraryThing para averiguar si este libro te gustará. Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro. for us boomers before the internet came around a MUST HAVE ( ) Several things about this book annoy me, but one thing makes me a bit irate. A reference book isn't worth a good deal unless the editors stive to make it objective and accurate and this one isn't consistently either. (Mine is the Head edition, so perhaps I'm being unfair to the others.) I've skipped about reading entries and have thus read that George Gissing had only one friend and that his marriages failed because Gissing felt that his wives weren't sufficiently grateful to him. I've also read that Isabel Burton burned her husband's writings because he drank a lot and travelled a lot. These don't seem to me simply sloppy inaccuracies. They're so supremely removed from the factual as to seem, particularly in the Gissing entry, the product of malevolence. Why? Because they're dead white men--or, worse, dead white Victorian men? Because the writer(s) didn't approve of their books? And if I lit upon these porkies by chance, how many more are there in the volume? I'm keeping the book because it has entries on the more modern British writers, but I'm taking it all with a packload of salt--and I'm pitying any student who might be relying on it. For an infinitely superior reference, get The Reader's Encyclopedia, ed. Benet. Not only does it seem objective and accurate but it has the enormous bonus of covering mythological and religious works, literary terms, and the like. (After writing that much, I kept the Guide for a year. I rarely used it, never browsed it, and found it wasn't even much of a help with the TLS crosswords Before packing it away with books to be traded in, I riffled through it to see whether my perception that there was a strange disproportion in it had any basis. Leaving aside personal taste and considering only reputation/skill/influence I was disheartened to find that the entry for P.G. Wodehouse was longer than that for William Gass and that Agatha Christie's entry was longer than Elizabeth Taylor's. And within these pairs, each writer was given very nearly equal column inches: Mary Shelley and Edgar Allen Poe; J.K. Rowling and William Burroughs; James Thomson (B.V.) and George Orwell; and, sigh, Mrs Humphrey Ward and Oscar Wilde.) sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
Substantially enlarged and updated, this new edition of The Cambridge Guide to Literature in English confirms its status as the most authoritative survey of its subject now available in a single volume. Its coverage of novelists, poets, playwrights, and their works embraces both the established classics of English literature and a wealth of contemporary figures from all over the English-speaking world, such as Saul Bellow, Les Murray, R. K. Narayan, Mordecai Richler and Ben Okri. No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca. |
Debates activosNingunoCubiertas populares
Google Books — Cargando... GénerosSistema Decimal Melvil (DDC)820.9Literature English & Old English literatures English literature in more than one form History, description, critical appraisal of works in more than one formClasificación de la Biblioteca del CongresoValoraciónPromedio:
¿Eres tú?Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing. |