My reaction to IN GREEN'S JUNGLES

Peter Westlake · 05 Dec 2000, 17:05 · from whorl-v0012.mbox · original

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: Peter Westlake <peter at harlequin.co.uk>
Subject: RE: (whorl) My reaction to IN GREEN'S JUNGLES
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 17:05:35 +0000
Message-ID: <whorl-v0012-0047 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/whorl/archives/v0012/0047.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 08:50 2000-12-05 -0800, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:
>> -- I'm glad I went ahead and purchased the hardcover instead of waiting =
for the TPB.
>> Notwithstanding my junkie-like desperation for the next SHORT SUN instal=
lment, the
>> fact that I could leave the dust jacket at home averted many potentially=
-embarrassing
>> situations. I know it's been discussed before on this list, but it bears=
 repeating:
>> that cover is an abomination.  I mean, just look at it.  Does it grab yo=
u and demand
>> your attention, saying: "This book is superbly erudite, marvelously witt=
y, and worthy
>> of the closest scrutiny.  It is the best its genre has to offer and you =
owe it to
>> yourself to read it"?  I'm afraid not.  Instead, it shouts to unsuspecti=
ng passersby:
>> "The person reading this is a socially-maladapted head case and is best =
given a wide
>> berth!"  Ehhh, I could go on for hours about SF's image problem, but I'l=
l just stop
>> here.
>
>While I agree with you in the general case, about SF's "image problem," I =
have to ask...
>Am I the _only_ person here who likes the covers on OBW and IGJ? I find th=
is frankly hard=20
>to believe; the marketing department at TOR can't be utter ninnies. (Thoug=
h I do recall
>Deb Notkin once defining publishers as "companies whose job is to prevent =
the sale of
>as many books as possible.") The illustrations clearly represent important=
 moments in
>the course of the book, without "giving away the plot;" additionally, they=
 are competent
>(to say the least) in layout and execution. What, beyond this, anyone want=
s from a cover
>illo is beyond me.

I liked the cover of OBW, though I agree that it does have potential
for embarrassment; even then, a lot less than a simple description
featuring "a blonde woman with no clothes" would suggest!

I didn't like the cover of IGJ, though. The mysterious figure of the
Neighbour was reduced to a cartoon spider-horse-man, and the jungles
didn't seem dense enough. Mind you, the jungles don't feel dense and
"jungly" in IGJ, especially compared to the hints in OBW. There's no
mention of the towering cliffs, or the "trees that eat trees that eat
trees". That was a little disappointing, or would have been if what
*was* in the book hadn't been so good.

>The overall cover designs also impressed me: the white strip at the top wi=
th the=20
>author's name just, I dunno, looks classy -- says in a clearly coded way, =
"this is a
>Major Writer."

The dark covers under the jacket, silver titles, and something about the
pages at the very beginning also bespeak Quality.

Thanks for the recommendations, and for the warning about Peter Hamilton to=
o.

Spectacled Bear.

*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

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net