{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/1088",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "whorl",
  "thread": {
    "id": 1088,
    "subject": "Wolfe Cover Art",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "2001-02-01T10:40:59+00:00",
    "last": "2001-02-01T10:40:59+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<whorl-v0012-0108@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "E Dorian",
        "address": "edorian at hotmail.com"
      },
      "date": "2001-02-01T10:40:59+00:00",
      "subject": "(whorl) Wolfe Cover Art",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I think the cover of the trade paperback version of The Devil in a Forest is \nstunning, and I would buy the print and hang it on my wall, if it were \navailable.  (btw, internet pictures of the cover(like at Amazon) don't do it \njustice.)\n\nDragonfly"
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "From: jclute at cix.compulink.co.uk (John Clute)\nReply-To: whorl at lists.best.com\nTo: whorl at lists.best.com\nSubject: Re: (whorl) BEATING AN EIGHT-LEGGED HORSE\nDate: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 11:59 +0100 (BST)\n\nIn-Reply-To: <200009021918.MAA02421 at lists1.best.com>\nA couple comments:\n        1) I thought the _New Sun_ covers were abominable. But this made\nno difference.\n        2) I thought the _design_ of the _Short Sun_ covers was\nphilistine, and destroyed any virtues the covers might possess.\n        3) I think Jim Burns usually does very well with books he\nillustrates, and that these covers--if the art can be abstracted from the\ndesign of the whole--are meritorious but failed attempts at doing\nilluminations of a text of quite extraordinary visual difficulty. None of\nus on this list seems really to know what any of the main characters in\nthe book look light at any one moment. Fixing this sort of thing into a\nvisual representation is something Jim was not able to do. He was probably\nthe wrong kind of artist for the job, though he is unusual in the fact he\nactually reads the ms he's illustrating, with great care. But find the\nright artist. The world of _Short Sun_ is immensely less fixable than the\nworld of its predecessors, all of which have execrable art. Is there any\n_good_ Gene Wolfe visual?\n\nBest,\nJohn C\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun."
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}