Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Yes. And it's also proving that it's hard to do so quietly. There will always be vocal proponents of the "best" editions of works that would most elicit that sort of desire to change. Scholars will be vocal about changes to "classic" works.
|
Oh? Did someone other than the uploader report the Wilkie Collins work as changed? I don't recall seeing any posts warning about changes in books in the MR library, either this book or any others that have been uploaded.
When a traditional publisher offers a new edition of a classic, since the point is to sell more copies, the publisher highlights the changes as a selling point: Can't understand that old-fashioned language? Here's a modernized and updated version for ya.
There is no similar motivation for an uploader to be public about making changes.
Quote:
I have no trouble doing my own research into the authenticity of various editions. I'm not really concerned about other readers being fooled. Not because I don't care, but because I'm willing to trust that most readers aren't hapless victims, and can think and choose for themselves.
Nobody's entitled to free--meticulously verified--public domain works. Probably need to choose which of those aspects is more important to us as readers.
|
Have you downloaded any books from the MR library? Project Gutenberg? Manybooks? How have you verified them for accuracy? Do you proof everything against the copies at archive.org? (Although of course Harry earlier noted some problems with even those copies.) Or do you proof them against your personal library of print copies?
Or do you assume--take on blind faith, like a hapless victm--that, say, Penguin e-book editions are accurate? Why? They're a major publisher, and why trust one of those money-grubbing, unscrupulous major publishers? Major publishers are demonized when it comes to current books, but the gold standard for classics?