The Riverside Shakespeare: Amazon.ca: William Shakespeare, G. Blakemore Evans, J.J M. Tobin: Books

Frequently Bought Together

Product Description

From Library Journal

This gorgeous, boxed, two-volume set includes the bard's full canon of plays supplemented with 50 illustrations as well as 40 pages of color and black-and-white plates, critical prefaces to each work, detailed notes on the texts, and many other goodies. This second edition also includes Edward III and "A Funeral Elegy," which scholars now believe to be written by old Will, as well as new essays on stage history and criticism. The appendixes, chronologies, and bibliographies have also been updated. Simply superb.
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Book Description

The Second Edition of this complete collection of Shakespeare's plays and poems features two essays on recent criticism and productions, fully updated textual notes, a photographic insert of recent productions, and two works recently attributed to Shakespeare. The authors of the essays on recent criticism and productions are Heather DuBrow, University of Wisconsin at Madison, and William Liston, Ball State University, respectively.

See all Product Description

Suggested Tags from Similar Products

(What's this?)

Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)

shakespeare(3)

literature(1)

plays(1)

anthology(2)

norton(2)

textbook(2)

Customer Reviews

16 Reviews

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

Average Customer Review

4.4 out of 5 stars (16 customer reviews)

Share your thoughts with other customers:

Create your own review

Most helpful customer reviews

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars A solid if limited edition, Sep 11 2001

By

Joost Daalder "Joost Daalder" (South Australia) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

This review is from: The Riverside Shakespeare (Hardcover)

I would not myself prescribe this edition if I needed to choose one for, say, a year-long course on Shakespeare, but it is respectable and valuable nonetheless, and I have never minded my students using it. In comparison to the Norton, it is far more sensible, level-headed, and sharper in its selection of what is relevant to the needs of most readers. It offers help in a way that for example the Oxford unannotated Complete Works does not. The level of scholarship is usually very sound, in all areas. However, the edition lacks the required intellectual life, to my mind, which it should have and which I find in David Bevington's edition (and, despite some perversities, in the Norton); it is in some ways a bit perfunctory, unenterprising, and not sufficiently incisive in its insights. This is also an edition which at times unduly tends to favour the interests of academics over those of ordinary readers. The text, notably, preserves a number of features which are quite unnecessarily archaic to a modern reader. Who benefits from being faced with such spellings as "bumbast" rather than "bombast"? The introductions are more often useful or predictable than truly engaging, and the explanatory notes are in several places not as informative as they should be. Even so, this is an edition of considerable merit, and one that those who for some mysterious reason do not wish to buy David Bevington's excellent edition would probably be best served by. - Joost Daalder, Professor of English, Flinders University, South Australia

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful

2.0 out of 5 stars As stated earlier, notation format nearly ruins this edition, April 7 2003

By

Jordan Cox (Ottawa, ON CA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Riverside Shakespeare (Hardcover)

I haven't read the other completed works extensively (although the Bevington and Norton editions seem to be the ones most highly praised), but the footnote format of the Riverside is so irritating that I'm selling the copy I bought last year for the first half of my 2nd-year Shakespeare survey course, and picking up either the Norton or the Bevington (although I have yet to personally see Bevington's footnote format). As was stated before, here are the problems with the annotation/footnotes:

The lines are numbered in a standard "every-fifth-line" format. This would be fine if we as readers weren't required to know exactly what line we're on at all times, but the footnotes demand this.

For example:

"Therefore thy threat'ning colors now wind up" is King John, V.ii.73. Unless you are counting the actual number of each line in your head as you read (impossible, it seems) you will only know we're on line 73 when you look over to the right, see lines 70 and 75 marked, and then quickly estimate/count the lines in between. The problem is the note at the bottom, which simply says:

73. wind: furl.

Like the earlier reviewer said, to figure out whether or not a footnote exists, you must read a line or two, determine what line number(s) you've just read through a line-counting process, and then go down to the footnotes to see if anything matches. Once you've matched the line number to the footnote, you have to go back to the line and find the word that's footnoted, because it's not marked in any way.

The Norton method (while some find it intrusive) is certainly easier for students, and the Bevington method sounds interesting (giving the line numbers in the margin only where there is a footnote existsing). The Riverside is just too irritating for most students to use.

Some say this method slows the reading process down, and forces one to go through the text more slowly, thus giving a closer reading. To this I'd say that the process of line-counting and stopping every 2-3 lines to "check" for footnotes that may not exist (besides the process of word-matching once a footnote is found) perverts the close reading just as much or moreso than any sort of footnotes condusive to easier, faster reading ever could.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

5.0 out of 5 stars correction, Jan 29 2008

By

Mark - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Riverside Shakespeare (Hardcover)

in response to 'Much Better to Use Than Norton', Harold Bloom wrote that the New Oxford edition was the worst, I don't know which version this is based on.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 16 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

Want to see more reviews on this item?

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 39 reviews 4.5 out of 5 stars

Most recent customer reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars Much Better to Use Than Norton
I bought this edition after using the Norton in my last semester Shakespeare class, and have found my reading of the plays for this semester's class much more enjoyable. Read more

Published on Feb 24 2004

4.0 out of 5 stars Great for the Ritual
My favorite part of acting are the the little rituals that ALL actors have. As a young actor, and one who hopes to focus mainly on the classical stage, my most important ritual is... Read more

Published on Jun 19 2002 by Mark Lawson