Daniel E. White: From Little London to Little Bengal: Religion, Print, and Modernity in Early British India, 1793-1835
« Scattered Last-Minute-Before-the-Semester-Begins Links and Musings |
| Murphy's Law »
"But Thackeray illustrated himself, something that is often forgotten." By whom?
Oh, and I'm so not looking forward to Reese Witherspoon as Becky.
August 30, 2004 in Books | Permalink
I'm not a literary scholar, but I thought the Times article seemed rather confused. When she says "Readers are now used to the notion of a graphic novel...But something very different is happens in "Vanity Fair"...she never goes on to explain *how* it is different.
Although she takes the obligatory shot at technology, I suspect that the best chance most readers will have of seeing the original etchings will be when someone puts it up on the web...
David Foster |
August 30, 2004 at 11:03 AM
Actually, the etchings are in the Norton Critical Edition of Vanity Fair. It's true that the illustrations are key to interpreting Thackeray's text, since they provide additional information and complicate the narrative at key points.
August 30, 2004 at 11:17 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.