Collins Bird Guide 2nd Ed; Reviewed (1 Viewer)

[Richard Klim]

Great Grey Shrike

I'm a bit confused over the treatment of 'Steppe' Grey Shrike.

The recognition by most authorities of a widespread polytypic Lanius meridionalis 'Southern Grey Shrike', including pallidirostris 'Steppe Grey Shrike', has recently been shown to be erroneous, eg, Olsson et al 2009:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=02cffc31405f40e92edb2495dbab43ff

Further work is needed to determine the best final arrangement for the excubitor complex, but L. meridionalis is better treated as monotypic (as by Svensson et al, and Dutch Birding). [Pallidirostris may end up as a subspecies of L. lahtora.] Svensson et al's novel split of L. borealis Northern Shrike (p420) is probably also justified.

Richard

PS. For clarity, a possible treatment suggested by Olsson et al is:

• L. lahtora - Indian Grey Shrike (including aucheri, theresae, buryi, pallidirostris)
• L. excubitor - Great Grey Shrike (including homeyeri, 'leucopterus')
• L. elegans - Desert Grey Shrike (including koenigi, algeriensis, leucopygos, 'jebelmarrae')
• L. uncinatus - Socotra Grey Shrike (monotypic)
• L. borealis - Northern Shrike (including invictus, sibiricus, bianchii, mollis, funereus)
• L. meridionalis - Iberian Grey Shrike (monotypic)

 

[Keith Dickinson]

Just had e-mail reply from Harper Collins, large format edition scheduled for October this year, just in time for Christmas.

 

[bluechaffinch]

The book is superb. I am in awe of the writers and artists (and the editors).



Yeah, two letters misplaced from 450 pages of translated text. Terrible job. Recall and burn it along with the editorial staff. Shame that what would have been the best field guide ever produced for any region of the planet is rendered completely unusable because of a W and a U.

It is proofreader, by the way...

Oh come on, relax. I was simply pointing out the fact that in what is , I agree, the best field guide ever produced to date, it is not too much to ask that the editorial board and the PROOFREADERS (point taken) would spot a glaring typo - they've had the best part of a decade to work on this book after all.

Perhaps I should've mentioned that the artwork is exceptional for the most part and that some of the new plates (e.g. Atlantic island pigeons, goshawk vignette) are simply superb. I fully acknowledge the significant achievement in getting this revised edition out, but there is an impression that it is a bit rushed in some areas. It is by no means perfect. That's all. I will now, suitably chastised , pay gushing homage on bended knee at the shrine of our saints S, M and Z and may not a bad thought ever enter my head again.

 

[Dimitris]

The 13th language it was translated was/is indeed Greek.

D.

 

[Richard Klim]

The 13th language it was translated was/is indeed Greek.

OK, thanks Dimitris. Now we've completed the set, I'll sleep more easily.

1. Swedish
2. Danish
3. Dutch
4. English
5. Finnish
6. French
7. German
8. Greek
9. Hebrew
10. Hungarian
11. Norwegian
12. Portuguese
13. Spanish

I wonder if the authors have copies of them all?

Richard

 

[Edward]

The 13th language it was translated was/is indeed Greek.

D.

Modern or Ancient? So that's the thirteen. I wonder if the new edition will attract any more translations into new languages. Surprised that it wasn't translated into Italian with its 70 million speakers.

 

[Pariah]

My own Copy arrived today.
My take on it. Overall, pretty damn good.

http://corkdudeing.blogspot.com/

Owen

 

[John Cantelo]

First of all congratulations to John Cantelo for not only being the first to submit a detailed review of this guide, but also on being 'spot on' with everything he mentioned.

Thank you!

 

[John Cantelo]

John, great review cheers, mine arrived yesterday after ordering from Amazon in August.
Very pleased with it!

... and thanks again!

 

[John Cantelo]

My own Copy arrived today.
My take on it. Overall, pretty damn good.

http://corkdudeing.blogspot.com/

Owen

An interesting review, Owen, but 8/10 seems rather nigardly to me. When all said and done even the 'worst' plates would still be considered amongst the best from most other such guides. Whilst we agree on several plates (e.g. the owls), I note that some you had reservations about were ones I thought 'spot on'. Furthermore, in at least one case a plate you considered amongst the best was damned by others.

I mean to say, what do the poor fellows have to do to get 9/10, let alone a perfect ten? I suspect, being so perfectionist/opinionated (select your preference) the answer would be only when you could dictate the text and supervise the artwork! An interesting, if unlikely, scenario,

 

[Pariah]

Not at all john, But when the first edition raised the bar the curve had to be re-assessed. The 2 points were lost for what it could have contained but did'nt. And theres no doubt all the artwork is great,....but consistent? 8/10 is a good rating. Owen
So which plate was it I liked that got slammed?

 

[John Cantelo]

Not at all john,

But when the first edition raised the bar the curve had to be re-assed. The 2 points were lost for what it could have contained but did'nt. And theres no doubt all the artwork is great,....but consistent? 8/10 is a good rating.

Owen

So which plate was it I liked that got slammed?

'fraid I can't agree, Owen, it deserves more than a miserly 8/10. It was the Turtle Dove page that got criticised- can't see owt wrong with it myself, but then I've never seen Oriental,

 

[scary-canary]

But that's the paperback - only £11.69 from Amazon UK - and anyway not published until March.

Richard

Thanks for pointing that out.. just cancelled the order!
Chris

 

[derekg]

But that's the paperback - only £11.69 from Amazon UK - and anyway not published until March.

Richard

Cheers Richard, have just cancelled my paperback order from play and ordered the hardback from amazon for £16.25

Derek

 

[Doctor Twitchings]

My own Copy arrived today.
My take on it. Overall, pretty damn good.

http://corkdudeing.blogspot.com/

Owen

A great review, and for anyone who has not read it, it's well worth checking out. I have to say that I pretty much agree with your review of this superb guide - an excellent book, but perhaps still falling a little short in some areas.

 

[Swissboy]

.....I wonder if the authors have copies of them all?

Richard

And I was wondering how you determined the sequence here? Or why does the Greek version not stand at the end, since it's the last one known to complete to list? But you puzzled me earlier as well. Maybe that's why I noticed it again. Alphabetical, except for the original that stands at the top? So is Swedish still the original language for the second edition?

 

[Richard Klim]

And I was wondering how you determined the sequence here? Or why does the Greek version not stand at the end, since it's the last one known to complete to list? But you puzzled me earlier as well. Maybe that's why I noticed it again. Alphabetical, except for the original that stands at the top? So is Swedish still the original language for the second edition?

Yes, I simply placed the original language (Swedish) first, with all the translations in (impartial) alphabetical order as I don't know the actual publication sequence - no hidden agenda, I promise!

The front papers list the Swedish edition first, suggesting it's still technically the original (but perhaps someone else can confirm?):

• Originally published in 1999 in Swedish, Fågelguiden. Europas och Medelhavsområdets fåglar i fält, by Bonniers, Stockholm
• 2nd revised and enlarged edition published in 2009 by Bonnier Fakta, Stockholm
• 2nd revised and enlarged edition © 2009 HarperCollins Publishers, London
• Translation and English adaptation: David A. Christie & Lars Svensson

Richard

PS. I made a complete ass of myself in Israel in 2001: I met a birder using the Swedish version, and said something stupid like "So the Collins Bird Guide has been translated into Swedish..." :h?:

 

[Birdbrain]

Ordered my bible last night from Amazon :t: due date 4th March. (paperback)

 

[Pariah]

'fraid I can't agree, Owen, it deserves more than a miserly 8/10. It was the Turtle Dove page that got criticised- can't see owt wrong with it myself, but then I've never seen Oriental,

Well everyone has their own tastes I guess. Notice though, that I didn't go into the whole typos and omissions aspects and focused primarily on content. (and typos are present in there if you look...e.g the European robin plate)

For me, the content is whats important. And I feel as though I have looked at that fairly.

Owen

 

[username]

Just read your review Owen.....i found it very enjoyable and informative!
At present tho...as i am 'book-less'...i can neither agree or disagree with any of the reviewing that's been going on...

All i know is that....[in the first edition]...tho very pleasing to the eye...it occasionally 'fell down' upon close scrutiny with certain species...

ps....i've never looked on your blog before...looks entertaining....[any blog that features 'Thor' in it has got to be worth at least a second look]....[me being a comicbook freak n all]...!