Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 10:06:59 -0500
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at mail.press.jhu.edu>
To: <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: All in the eye of the beholder....
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

>StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL 02/03/03 09:51AM
>  The ambitiously indefatigable Mr. Michael Walsh recommends that I
>visit a bookstore for the purpose of gazing upon hideous book covers.

Well, needless to say there are lots of those, but my suggestion was just =
to gawk at the image and production of the JANUS cover.  You will have to =
hold it the correct angle to actually see it. . .

>Well,
>this is arguably the worst reason ever advanced for visiting a bookstore.

When I worked at WaldenBooks people would come in ask if we sold pencils.
Now folks go to bookstores in search of dates.
Sometimes books are even sold.

>Yet I shall accept the challenge since I can also inspect the books =
within.
>As one of Mr. Baen's customers, I find the covers of his David Weber and
>John Ringo books to be high quality paintings illustrating either =
specific
>scenes from the contained story or symbolic representations of the
>scenario... which I believe is the purpose of cover illustrations  Don't
>recall Mr. B's Andre Norton covers.

In theory covers sell books (Ok, exceptions are the yellow covers of the =
Gollancz hardcover skiffy books and in general th early Penguin's) and a =
publisher makes a decision that such & such image will sell to the right =
folks.  Nothing worse than putting a mystery cover on a skiffy book  -  =
and vice-versa -  which has happened.

But the bottom line, for me [YMMV]  of the Baen covers is that they do not =
interest me.  And the two Baen books I have read (& finished) were on the =
basis of recommendations from friends who knew of this prejudice, knew =
what I liked, and said "Read this, you'll like it."

mjw