Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of Swords with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any ideas?
Richard F. Dickson "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
are...@aol.com (Areff D) wrote: >Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of Swords >with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was >released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some >dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any >ideas?
Dunno, but here in Sweden, I have only seen the DKS version.
In article <19971218050800.AAA22...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, are...@aol.com
(Areff D) wrote: > Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of Swords > with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was > released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some > dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any > ideas?
There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
>> Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of >Swords >> with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was >> released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some >> dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any >> ideas?
>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a >dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. >I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
>-- Ben
Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art worked cover
> >There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a > >dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. > >I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
> >-- Ben
Frankly, I was relieved to see the art-free cover. Even when he tries Sweet is a competent artist at best, but his Jordan covers are attrocious. Nevermind the dull subject matters, lifeless poses, and dubious visual interpretations: some of the basic drawing mistakes bound into the realm of the embarrassing. Some of the earlier covers indicate some degree of commitment, but I'd be surprised if the thoroughly amateurish "Lord of Chaos" cover took him more than an afternoon. These works are more appropriate to cheap romance novels than mainstream best-sellers. It would be hard for Tor to choose less appealing frontspieces for its merchandise. These covers are off-putting, and serve to give the otherwise noteworthy series an air of rather low quality.
Chris Douglas wrote: > It would be hard for Tor to choose less appealing > frontspieces for its merchandise. These covers are off-putting, and > serve to give the otherwise noteworthy series an air of rather low > quality.
Honestly, I didn't buy into the series for the longest time -- despite the accolades -- because the series looked, well, cheap. The covers are atrocious and have been getting steadily *worse* -- it's unreal for a tremendous series like this to be burdened with such horrendous covers, while other books of dubious quality garner excellent cover artists.
Of course this is a tradition with a rather long history. The Berkeley covers for Tolkien were atrocious, and the covers specially designed for the anniversary edition in the late-'80s were worse.
Andrew J Codling schrieb in Nachricht <34a3edbc.4226...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a >>dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. >>I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
>>-- Ben
>Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art >worked cover
If you are thinking Sweets ARTWORK is bad you have to keep wide clear of the "ART" on the paperbacks of the German translation. They're not only ten times worse than Sweet's there are also twice as many, because the German translations only contain half of one original book, so you have to buy twice as many. Luckily my bookstore also sells the English originals. BTW if anyody thought TWORJWOT expensive with 39$, they're wrong. I was very surprised to see the TWORJWOT in the stores only one week after the publishing date, but then I saw the price of 140 Deutsche Mark which is twice as much as the original 39 $, So does anyone know a good online bookstore that is also delivering to Germany?
> >>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a > >>dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. > >>I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
> >>-- Ben
> >Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art > >worked cover > If you are thinking Sweets ARTWORK is bad you have to keep wide clear of the > "ART" on the paperbacks of the German translation. They're not only ten > times worse than Sweet's there are also twice as many, because the German > translations only contain half of one original book, so you have to buy > twice as many. Luckily my bookstore also sells the English originals. > BTW if anyody thought TWORJWOT expensive with 39$, they're wrong. I was very > surprised to see the TWORJWOT in the stores only one week after the > publishing date, but then I saw the price of 140 Deutsche Mark which is > twice as much as the original 39 $, So does anyone know a good online > bookstore that is also delivering to Germany?
>>> Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of >>Swords >>> with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was >>> released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some >>> dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any >>> ideas?
>>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a >>dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. >>I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
>Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art >worked cover
Hear hear old bean! I think DKS's artwork is inaccurate, but who cares? And once I've started collecting a series, I like to have continuity with things like the artwork, in case I ever pass them on to my kids, or they become antiques or whatever.
Fluffy One wrote in message <349b6118.4799...@nntpserver.swip.net>... >are...@aol.com (Areff D) wrote:
>>Hey, I was at Barnes and Noble tonight and saw the paperback of Crown of Swords >>with the original Darrell K. Sweet hardcover artwork. Anybody know why it was >>released with the no-art cover and now with the artwork? Was there maybe some >>dispute with Sweet about using his art on the paperback? Anybody have any >>ideas?
>Dunno, but here in Sweden, I have only seen the DKS version.
> Andrew J Codling schrieb in Nachricht <34a3edbc.4226...@news.demon.co.uk>... > >>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a > >>dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. > >>I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
> >>-- Ben
> >Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art > >worked cover > If you are thinking Sweets ARTWORK is bad you have to keep wide clear of the > "ART" on the paperbacks of the German translation. They're not only ten > times worse than Sweet's there are also twice as many, because the German > translations only contain half of one original book, so you have to buy > twice as many. Luckily my bookstore also sells the English originals. > BTW if anyody thought TWORJWOT expensive with 39$, they're wrong. I was very > surprised to see the TWORJWOT in the stores only one week after the > publishing date, but then I saw the price of 140 Deutsche Mark which is > twice as much as the original 39 $, So does anyone know a good online > bookstore that is also delivering to Germany?
> > Andrew J Codling schrieb in Nachricht <34a3edbc.4226...@news.demon.co.uk>... > > >>There should be a dispute with Sweet's artwork. There should _always_ be a > > >>dispute about this -- but disputed by Tor, not Sweet. Interesting, though. > > >>I haven't seen that new cover. And me with my one book that doesn't match.
> > >>-- Ben
> > >Never mind Ben pop over to Blighty I too have only ever seen the art > > >worked cover > > If you are thinking Sweets ARTWORK is bad you have to keep wide clear of the > > "ART" on the paperbacks of the German translation. They're not only ten > > times worse than Sweet's there are also twice as many, because the German > > translations only contain half of one original book, so you have to buy > > twice as many. Luckily my bookstore also sells the English originals. > > BTW if anyody thought TWORJWOT expensive with 39$, they're wrong. I was very > > surprised to see the TWORJWOT in the stores only one week after the > > publishing date, but then I saw the price of 140 Deutsche Mark which is > > twice as much as the original 39 $, So does anyone know a good online > > bookstore that is also delivering to Germany?
