Subject: (whorl) BEATING AN EIGHT-LEGGED HORSE

From: Urash, Tom <turash at firstam.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 14:16:23 +0000

Having just received IGJ I just can't help myself. The cover sucks! As does
OBW's, imltho. Shadow was the first Wolfe book I ever bought: an impulse buy
spurred by the Maitz cover, and, Jesus MacGod!, am I ever grateful. Now,
like most you, I can't get enough. That first purchase was twenty some odd
years ago, and I'd never even heard of Gene Wolfe at the time. The young man
I was then, or so I surmise, wouldn't take a second glance at either of the
first two volumes of Short Sun based on the covers. I live in Texas and the
artist who paints the Short Sun covers reminds me of the myriad white Blues
guitarists in this state who, not uncommonly, are technically quite
proficient but lack that special something -- soul? -- that so many Black
Blues artists seem to evoke so effortlessly. Or, like Twain is reputed to
have told his wife upon her trying to shame his habitual swearing by doing a
little swearing of her own, "... you have the words, honey, but you don't
have the music." 

It says more about me than Wolfe, but I just hate the idea that he could
have been on board with the decision to use those covers. I'd rather imagine
some sort of evildoings that left him no choice but capitulate in the
matter. 

*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.
*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.moonmilk.com/whorl/
*To leave the list, send "unsubscribe" to whorl-request at lists.best.com
*If it's Wolfe but not Long Sun, please use the URTH list: urth at lists.best.com

---

From: John Clute <jclute at cix.compulink.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 10:59:00 +0000

A couple comments:
        1) I thought the _New Sun_ covers were abominable. But this made 
no difference.
        2) I thought the _design_ of the _Short Sun_ covers was 
philistine, and destroyed any virtues the covers might possess.
        3) I think Jim Burns usually does very well with books he 
illustrates, and that these covers--if the art can be abstracted from the 
design of the whole--are meritorious but failed attempts at doing 
illuminations of a text of quite extraordinary visual difficulty. None of 
us on this list seems really to know what any of the main characters in 
the book look light at any one moment. Fixing this sort of thing into a 
visual representation is something Jim was not able to do. He was probably 
the wrong kind of artist for the job, though he is unusual in the fact he 
actually reads the ms he's illustrating, with great care. But find the 
right artist. The world of _Short Sun_ is immensely less fixable than the 
world of its predecessors, all of which have execrable art. Is there any 
_good_ Gene Wolfe visual?

Best,
John C

---

From: Alastair Reynolds <areynold at estsa2.estec.esa.nl>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 11:13:30 +0000

John Clute wrote:
> 
> In-Reply-To: <200009021918.MAA02421 at lists1.best.com>
> A couple comments:

Do you refer to the Bruce Pennington covers of the New Sun books, John,
as used on the UK editions (paperback at least)? It's strange because
for me these absolutely define how I see the world of the New Sun. 
Neither the Don Maitz (US hardcover editions, I think) or the later
UK covers seemed to hit the right note. Funny things, covers...

Al

-- 
.

---

From: John Clute <jclute at cix.compulink.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 21:15:00 +0000

Al,
        I was referring to the US hardbacks, which is how I encountered 
the Book initially. I should retract the fullness of my utterance (I was 
writing late at night, not my best time), as I'm not very familiar with 
reprint editions, and I know some of the UK art differs from the US (some 
I think is the same). Pennington might well have done something memorable 
for me--I'll give the editions a look, thanks.

Best,
John