Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site hyper.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!ihnp1!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!hyper!brust
From: brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Pamela C. Dean's "The Secret Country"
Message-ID: <192@hyper.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-May-85 13:40:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: hyper.192
Posted: Wed May  8 13:40:51 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 10-May-85 02:28:58 EDT
References: <1912@topaz.ARPA>
Organization: Network Systems Corp., Mpls., Mn.
Lines: 62

> From: jen%mit-nessus@mit-athena.ARPA (Jennifer A Hawthorne)
> 
> I just finished reading Pamela C. Dean's "The Secret Country" the other 
> night and felt impelled to comment on something that really ticked me off.
> The book itself is a reasonably good read; it concerns a group of kids
> who invent an imaginary land for themselves and then manage to actually
> get to this place through the use of two magic swords. BUT---
> 
> ****FLAME WARNING****
> IT NEVER ENDED!!  ....................................................
> ....................................................................  The
> publisher did not deign to put "Book One in the Secret Country Series" or
> angry at the author, although I later realized that this was unfair to 
> Ms. Dean as she probably had no say in the matter.  

You are correct.  I'm pleased that, at least, you aren't
blaming the author.  What happened in this case is that
she wrote a book that was too long for a first novel,
so it had to be split.  I agree, and I'm sure Ms. Dean
agrees that the reader should have been warned.

>      Out of curiousity, SKZB, how does an author feel about the cover artwork
> on his books?  I noticed on "Yendi" that Vlad has no mustache and looks a lot
> older than twenty-one.  The artwork on the paperback edition of "To Reign in 
> Hell" looks nicely executed, but since I haven't read it yet, I don't know
> if it is faithful to the content.  How about it?
> 
> 					--Jennifer H.---
> 
> "Does the artwork on a book EVER have anything to do with the content?"
> 					-common question at MITSFS

The first purpose of cover art is to sell the book.  If, in so
doing, it can make a statement as to what the book is about,
so much the better.  If it can remain faithful to the
content of the book, that is more than anyone can
reasonably expect.

I feel very fortunate in the Vlad books.  The covers look
good, and artist Steve Hickman captured the feel of the
books very well, even though neither character (Vlad or
Loish) looks as I envision him.  So what?  He is,
quite literally, an artist.  He strains reality through
his own perceptions in just the way I strained it through
mine.  We are bound to have different filter because we
are different individuals.  When I see an artists rendition
of a character or scene from a story, it never looks the
way I envisioned it.  So what?  That is a bogus method
of judgeing a piece of art.  There is a thing called
"feel" or "spirit" that transcends physical description,
and if the artist captures that, my hat is off to him.  If
he does in on a book cover, and STILL manages to make the
cover attractive enough to sell (as Steve did), I am
delighted.

The painting for Hell was fine.  The trouble was the title.
In the first place, the lettering is atrocious.  In the
second, I should have called the book DRAGONRIDERS
OF HEAVEN.  Then the cover would have been perfect.
This'll teach me to put a dragon in my books!

			-- SKZB