# Penguin Classics vs. Oxford World's Classics **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 7, 2012, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046 "2012-02-07T03:43:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046/1 "2012-02-07T03:43:49Z")
I’ve decided to begin amassing a collection of classics and reading them, and have found that the Penguin Classics and Oxford World’s Classics generally offer the best editions with footnotes, background, introduction etc.? Which do you feel is superior? I’ve found that while most of the time Penguin Classics has lot’s more works they don’t have editions of for example _Twenty Years After_ or _Last Man_ by Shelley which OWC has. ---
**Author:** ![Implicit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Implicit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Implicit)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046/2 "2012-02-07T03:51:04Z")
Free and digital is superior, so Project Gutenberg and MobileRead. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046/3 "2012-02-07T15:45:14Z")
See above. Project Gutenberg has everything you need. If you must read dead trees, I tend to prefer Penguin. ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046/4 "2012-02-07T16:31:45Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > See above. Project Gutenberg has everything you need. > . You know what, I just don’t agree with that. The project Gutenberg versions almost never have annotations, and footnotes are a pain on an Ebook (I am reading Histories of Herotodus right now, and generally I skip the link FNs because it’s such a bother. I’m sure I’m missing out). And for translated works, they have only old translations, which are not necessarily the best translations, and they don’t indicate the translator, so you can’t choose between them easily.. Plus it isn’t comprehensive. There are fairly popular classics they don’t have. One example is Les Miserables. And the Histories of Herotodus. Between Penguin and Signet, I prefer Penguin, but I’m not totally familiar with Oxford World Classics. It does look like you get some neat extras with some of the volumes. ---
**Author:** ![jordanr2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/838e76/32.png) [@jordanr2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jordanr2)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/penguin-classics-vs-oxford-worlds-classics/612046/5 "2012-02-07T18:38:45Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > See above. Project Gutenberg has everything you need. …that is, if you don’t care about interesting ancillary essays, footnotes/endnotes that put things in context, and fresh translations. PG definitely has its place, but I wouldn’t say it makes inexpensive, reliable scholarly editions redundant. Between the two publishers, I’d say take it on a case-by-case basis: have a look at two editions of the same work and decide which seems more suitable for you. My collection includes works by both publishers, and with some works (especially in translation) it’s good to have multiple editions.