Literaturepage.com Analysis

During class, we had a look at Literaturepage.com and we compared its version of Macbeth with the Oxford version of Macbeth. We analyzed the prime differences in layout, punctuation, stage direction, and language, and discovered that much of the text deferred from the Oxford version on Literaturepage.com. Our conclusion: this is a horrible interpretation of the original Macbeth text.

In terms of appearance, the page itself is visually unappealing and is difficult to read. The font is difficult to focus on as it is bland and there is a large flashing "banner" across the top that shows Uncle Sam asking us to “TAKE A BRIEF SURVEY”. The lines are not numbered making it hard to follow sometimes and to find your place. The background is large and white, almost blinding, and the page itself becomes difficult to look at for more than a few seconds. Also, the lines are all left justified, destroying whatever meter Shakespeare intended for his play; as a modern day audience, unless we are explicitly shown the meter arranged in an obvious way, we will not get it.

This site contains many differences in punctuation from the Oxford edition, as well. These changes are mostly quite minor and do not change the scene too drastically. The most common change in punctuation is the addition of commas; this was probably done because the writer felt that the passage needed a pause to add to the dramatic effect. Another common punctuation change was the use of apostrophes in the place of the vowel ‘e’ when used in the past tense of a verb. Although this language may be considered elaborate in a way (the way people used to talk before), this change may make it harder for some readers to understand the text. In comparison to this, the Oxford text edition contain page numbers for every 10 lines, and do no use the apostrophe to replace the letter ‘e’ in verbs as often. As a result, it is easier to follow, and understand, in contrast with the Literaturepage.com version.

The stage directions immediately differ from the Oxford text edition and are also separated from the actual text, hidden in a header that is difficult to find without examining the page for longer than seems necessary. The text tells us that the witches "exeunt," but this page tells us that the "witches vanish." The use of the different words creates different moods (the use of the word ‘vanish’ is more mysterious). Furthermore, stage directions are not italicized, making it hard to distinguish them from the text. In addition, in contrast with the Oxford edition, the appearance of two minor characters is altered. In the Oxford edition, both Ross and Angus enter together towards the middle of the scene; Ross, in the online editions, does not enter until almost the end of the scene, and Angus doesn’t show up at all.

Hopefully, this website will not be around in two months, let alone five years. It’s a terrible resource: difficult to read, with odd uses of apostrophes and strange spellings, and a poor layout without numbered lines. The text has been ‘butchered’ to an extent, deferring greatly from the Oxford edition of the book that we are familiar with. All in all, it is a dreadful resource.