Green's cover

The Whorl list — 2 messages, 2 voices, 02 Mar 2000
https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/788

Nicholas Gevers02 Mar 2000, 14:47original
The cover of Tor's IN GREEN'S JUNGLES is now viewable on amazon.com. Jim Burns has, if anything, done an even more lurid job this time; the Neighbor looks like one of Vance's Pnume, or Phung, or whatever.
Jim Henley07 Mar 2000, 13:22original

↳ follows, by subject match Nicholas Gevers

16 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
-----Original Message----- From: Alastair Reynolds [mailto:areynold at estsa2.estec.esa.nl] Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 10:54 AM To: whorl at lists.best.com Subject: Re: (whorl) Green's Cover Alga:
Mr. Gethers announced:
The cover of Tor's IN GREEN'S JUNGLES is now viewable on amazon.com. Jim Burns has, if anything, done an even more lurid job this time; the Neighbor looks like one of Vance's Pnume, or Phung, or whatever.
You would certainly remove the cover if you planned to read the book in a public place.
Perhaps there should be a law saying that all lurid covers should be printed on the back with something sober and respectable - "10 secrets of success in business management" or something, so they can reversed for use in public. Wolfe's a difficult one though isn't he - the writing is of such excellent literary merit that you feel he ought to have a nice, tasteful up-market cover with no horrible SF things on it - on the other hand, his work is crammed full of nifty stuff for artists to illustrate...
Since one of the things literature does is help us see through false value systems, why not start with this one? A fear of being seen reading a book with "lurid covers" is prissy. And I mean that in the nicest possible way. Best, Jim *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

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.