Favourite Editions
James Nicoll
few years of shelf space. The bedroom is the large books section,
for hardcovers, comic compilations, cookbooks and suchlike. The one
downside of doing this that my books still stubbornly refuse to go to
the correct shelf so I spent a quiet evening sorting the fiction
into alphabetical order. Along the way, I came across the hardcover
edition of _Cool Runnings_, an early Hoyt from back when he was
readable [The end of the Cold War did nasty things to his spy
books set after that point]. The odd thing is, I originially
had that one in a paperback and I recently picked up a new used
copy of the paperback edition because I like that version better
than the HC. This is for purely sentimental reasons, you understand.
It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
if possible].
There was a great series of reprints in the 1970s. Can't
for the life of me remember the line but they had the first edition
of _Bring the Jubilee_. I lost it, unfortunately, and only have
a dog eared paperback.
James Nicoll
--
My Pledge: No more than 2 OT posts to rasfw a day. No replying
to trolls and idiots. Start five good on topic threads a day to drown
out the crap. Drink more coffee.
Brenda
James Nicoll wrote:
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
> HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
> revision. Just fond memories.
I find certain editions have infuriating illustrations on the cover, which
over the years can become galling. I far prefer my ancient paperback
Penguin edition of the Narnia Chronicles, with colored covers by Pauline
Baines, to the ugly modern art on some of the later editions. And there
are at least two or three TPB editions of PRECIOUS BANE out, one of which
is ugly as sin.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough, author of DOORS OF DEATH AND LIFE
From Tor Books in May 2000
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
William Clifford
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
>HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
>revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
>a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
>whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
>one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
>read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
>than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
>Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
>if possible].
>
> There was a great series of reprints in the 1970s. Can't
>for the life of me remember the line but they had the first edition
>of _Bring the Jubilee_. I lost it, unfortunately, and only have
>a dog eared paperback.
I refuse to read much less buy any copy of _The Hobbit_ that isn't
illustrated by JRRT. I developed my aversion to all other editions
at an early age. My very first copy of it I got in third grade, an
Unwin paperback from 1982. I was in third grade which means I had
to be eight or something.
--
William Clifford
wo...@yahoo.com
"Well, I'm back," he said.
Nancy Lebovitz
James Nicoll <jam...@nyquist.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
>HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
>revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
>a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
>whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
>one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
>read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
>than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
>Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
>if possible].
>
for Lord of the Rings, and I've never seen better covers for the
Skylark and Lensmen series than the brightly colored Gaughan semi-
abstracts. Besides, you have to admire someone who represents space
as bright pink with large red dots.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Andrew Plotkin
> James Nicoll wrote:
>> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
>> HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
>> revision. Just fond memories.
>
> I find certain editions have infuriating illustrations on the cover, which
> over the years can become galling. I far prefer my ancient paperback
> Penguin edition of the Narnia Chronicles, with colored covers by Pauline
> Baines, to the ugly modern art on some of the later editions. And there
> are at least two or three TPB editions of PRECIOUS BANE out, one of which
> is ugly as sin.
Some editions are flat-out superior. I have a copy of _The Neverending
Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green, instead
of plain and italic. This is better because italic has a "meta"
connotation, whereas red and green are purely different.
Early paperback editions of _Bridge of Birds_ have a strange
parchment-matte texture to the cover, which is excellently in keeping
with the overall uniqueness of the book.
And, of course, one must treasure the Worst Conceivable Cover of _The
Door Into Fire_. (Go ahead, conceive of it. It's worse.)
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
Mark Atwood
>
> I find certain editions have infuriating illustrations on the cover, which
> over the years can become galling. I far prefer my ancient paperback
> Penguin edition of the Narnia Chronicles, with colored covers by Pauline
> Baines,
Which, BTW, have been republished. And include the internal color
images as well. After seeing the internal artwork in color, and seeing
the original covers, I feel robbed.
--
Mark Atwood | The summit of Mount Everest is marine limestone.
m...@pobox.com |
http://www.pobox.com/~mra
aRJay
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
>HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
>revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
>a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
>whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
>one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
>read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
>than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
>Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
>if possible].
I think my favourite editions have to be the Gollancz HC Andre Norton
books with the jackets by Alan Breese these are from the late 60's early
70's, a nicely sized book (8" by 5" roughly) with non glossy jackets
illustrated with fairly accurate scenes from the book, usually only in
two or three colours. These of course were the editions that I met in
the library when I first encountered the books.
--
How does a rocket/jet engine work?
"It's not that hard.
Stuff goes in, stuff happens, stuff goes out faster than it came in."
- Ian Stirling
aRJay
Robert A. Woodward
<erky...@eblong.com> wrote:
<snip of people reminiscing of favorite editions>
>
> Some editions are flat-out superior. I have a copy of _The Neverending
> Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green, instead
> of plain and italic. This is better because italic has a "meta"
> connotation, whereas red and green are purely different.
<snip>
>
> And, of course, one must treasure the Worst Conceivable Cover of _The
> Door Into Fire_. (Go ahead, conceive of it. It's worse.)
Which edition of _The Door into Fire_? The original Dell paperback? The
Bluejay trade paperback? A more recent paperback?
--
rawoo...@aol.com
robe...@halcyon.com http://www.halcyon.com/robertaw/
Mark Atwood
>
> Some editions are flat-out superior. I have a copy of _The Neverending
> Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green, instead
> of plain and italic. This is better because italic has a "meta"
> connotation, whereas red and green are purely different.
I remember that one. That's the one my public library had.
Bill Miller
na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
>
> I'm imprinted on the Remmington covers (the blue-purple-red series)
> for Lord of the Rings, and I've never seen better covers for the
> Skylark and Lensmen series than the brightly colored Gaughan semi-
> abstracts. Besides, you have to admire someone who represents space
> as bright pink with large red dots.
>
I like those Pyramid edition Lensmen covers too (the color of space
changes on every one). Mine are so cracked & torn though (sob!)
Bill
--
Home: wbmi...@ghg.net
Work: william....@jsc.nasa.gov
Homepage: http://www.ghg.net/wbmiller3
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Ninni Pettersson
<snip>
>
> And, of course, one must treasure the Worst Conceivable Cover of _The
> Door Into Fire_. (Go ahead, conceive of it. It's worse.)
Aarrghh! I remember that one! (I suppose you're refering to the
Methuen edition, right?) It's one of the few books I've actually bought
a new copy of, because of the cover. (The Bluejay edition.) What was it
with Methuen in the late 70s / early 80s? Because the cover for their
edition of Cherryh's _The Fires of Azeroth_ was even more horrible than
_Door_ , unlikely as this may seem. (I bought a copy of the reprinted
DAW edition to replace this one .)
One of my favourite editions OTOH is the first paperback edition
of Cherryh's _Cyteen_ (the three part one). Probably because I really
like Don Maitz's art, and these covers are among his best works IMHO.
/Ninni Pettersson
--
Ninni Pettersson - Stockholm - Sweden
Mail-adress is vidumavi at swipnet dot se
Brenda
Mark Atwood wrote:
> Brenda <clo...@erols.com> writes:
> >
> > I find certain editions have infuriating illustrations on the cover, which
> > over the years can become galling. I far prefer my ancient paperback
> > Penguin edition of the Narnia Chronicles, with colored covers by Pauline
> > Baines,
>
> Which, BTW, have been republished. And include the internal color
> images as well. After seeing the internal artwork in color, and seeing
> the original covers, I feel robbed.
>
The most loathsome edition is the one with the vaguely modernist
out-of-proportion figures. They came out in the '80's.
Scott Beeler
>Some editions are flat-out superior. I have a copy of _The Neverending
>Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green, instead
>of plain and italic. This is better because italic has a "meta"
>connotation, whereas red and green are purely different.
Early editions of _The Princess Bride_ also have red lettering instead
of italics, IIRC. I'd love to get a copy of that, as well as the
above _Neverending Story_, sometime.
--
Scott Beeler scbe...@mindspring.com
Richard Horton
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:31:15 +0100, aRJay <aR...@escore.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
>I think my favourite editions have to be the Gollancz HC Andre Norton
>books with the jackets by Alan Breese these are from the late 60's early
>70's,
Don't tell me ... was Alan Breese a modern artist who painted a bright
yellow rectangle? Then sued Gollancz because they were stealing his
painting and using it on their books?
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard...@sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)
Aaron P. Brezenski
James Nicoll <jam...@nyquist.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
>HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
>revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
>a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
>whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
>one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
>read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
>than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
>Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
>if possible].
Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
I've never seen it again, and haven't had much luck finding it online-- I
don't know when the thing was published, and there are more versions of "The
Hobbit" out there than you can shake a stick at.
You can debate the merits of the movie, or even the art *from* the movie,
but I have to say it'd be nice to be able to have that edition today so I
could read it to my daughter, who's still somewhat enamored of books with
pictures all over the place...
--
Aaron Brezenski
"Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean there isn't someone out to get me."
Card-Carrying Member of the Illuminati
Forrest
>_The Neverending
>Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green
..which gave me terrible eyestrain.
"But then I put on red-green glasses and instantly the characters
became three-dimensional!"
Andrew Plotkin
> In article <97270765...@rexx.com>, Andrew Plotkin
> <erky...@eblong.com> wrote:
>> And, of course, one must treasure the Worst Conceivable Cover of _The
>> Door Into Fire_. (Go ahead, conceive of it. It's worse.)
> Which edition of _The Door into Fire_? The original Dell paperback? The
> Bluejay trade paperback? A more recent paperback?
First UK edition, I think. Magnum.
The original Dell paperback cover is merely cheesy.
Holly E. Ordway
>Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
>collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
>thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
>full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
>You can debate the merits of the movie, or even the art *from* the movie,
>but I have to say it'd be nice to be able to have that edition today so I
>could read it to my daughter, who's still somewhat enamored of books with
>pictures all over the place...
Have you seen the hardcover edition of The Hobbit with illustrations by
Alan Lee? It's *lovely*. (I have The Lord of the Rings with his
illustrations, and haven't gotten The Hobbit in that edition yet, but I
spent a while drooling over it in a bookstore). Most of the illustrations
are in color plates, but there are a lot of them, and I think that Alan
Lee's illustrations are the absolute best I've seen for capturing the feel
of Tolkien's work. I believe that in addition to the color plates, The
Hobbit also has line drawings at least at the start of each chapter, maybe
more often. You might want to check it out.
--Holly
William Burns
>Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> wrote:
Coloured lettering? That's been done more than once? The only book
I've ever seen with it is the 1931 edition of HG Wells _The Time
Machine_. On first reading it, mumble-years ago, I thought it merely
a one-time experiment by Random House.
It does qualify as a 'Favourite Edition'. Not hard, since it's the
only one I own and it does get re-read from time to time.
--
William
Only 64 days, then it's "Welcome to the Third"
aRJay
Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> writes
>
>On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:31:15 +0100, aRJay <aR...@escore.demon.co.uk
>>
>wrote:
>
>>I think my favourite editions have to be the Gollancz HC Andre Norton
>>books with the jackets by Alan Breese these are from the late 60's early
>>70's,
>
>Don't tell me ... was Alan Breese a modern artist who painted a bright
>yellow rectangle? Then sued Gollancz because they were stealing his
>painting and using it on their books?
>
Gollancz juvenile/YA/childrens had a fully illustrated dust jacket
usually with the illustration covering the whole jacket not just the
front. The ones I have and those that I remember are rather like a
shaded pencil or pastels sketch done on a coloured ground. Strangely non
of my "Yellow Jacket" Gollancz books credit the cover artist.
Mark-Jason Dominus
(and the others) with the iconic illustrations by Ron Walotsky. Some
very smart person decided to make the rest of each of the cover black,
so the art really stood out. Except _Doorways in the Sand_, which was
purple for some reason.
But I'm also going to nominate those covers in the 'worst back-cover
blurb' category.
HE WHO RULES
a m b e r
RULES THE ONE TRUE WORLD
HE WHO THWARTS AMBER
INVITES THE WRATH OF
a m b e r
b e t r a y e d .
Yipes!
Kate Nepveu
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions.
I bought UK paperbacks of _The Lord of the Rings_ because they had
such nice covers [1] and my leather one-volume collection didn't go on
subways easily; this week I saw a matching edition of _The
Silmarillion_ and had to forcibly restrain myself from buying it--"No,
your edition is just a little battered, you don't need to replace it,
and they're not really a set anyway so it doesn't matter if they
match..."
Usually, though, because I have a really precise memory for where on
the page and in the book a piece of text was, my favorite edition is
the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a passage
or a piece of textevd.
[1] Fellowship:
http://www.chapters.ca/books/details/default.asp?ISBN=0261102354
I can't find the other covers easily.
Kate
--
http://lynx.neu.edu/k/knepveu/ -- The Paired Reading Page; Reviews
"I can't promise that I'll grow those wings
Or keep this tarnished halo shined
But I'll never betray your trust
Angel mine" --Cowboy Junkies, "Angel Mine"
Kate Nepveu
> tina...@primenet.com (Aaron P. Brezenski) wrote:
> >Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
> >collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
> >thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
> >full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
> >You can debate the merits of the movie, or even the art *from* the movie,
> >but I have to say it'd be nice to be able to have that edition today so I
> >could read it to my daughter, who's still somewhat enamored of books with
> >pictures all over the place...
> Have you seen the hardcover edition of The Hobbit with illustrations by
> Alan Lee? It's *lovely*.
I checked Amazon, and the cover on that seems to be the one I remember
from my childhood [1]. If so, I heartily second Holly's
recommendation; Mom used to read to me from that one, and later I read
it myself, and the rest is history...
I don't know if we still have it, but if we do, I've got to remember
to get Mom to put it aside for my kids.
[1] http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0395873460.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
Robert Massey
} I refuse to read much less buy any copy of _The Hobbit_ that isn't
} illustrated by JRRT. I developed my aversion to all other editions
} at an early age. My very first copy of it I got in third grade, an
} Unwin paperback from 1982. I was in third grade which means I had
} to be eight or something.
My favorite versions of _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ are the
Ballantine paperback editions with Professor Tolkien's paintings on the cover.
Purely for sentimental reasons, though. I bought hardback editions of both a
few years ago since the paperbacks were falling apart.
Robert
Ninni Pettersson
> Ninni Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> wrote in
> <1ej89dj.cx...@d212-151-249-246.swipnet.se>:
>
> >Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >>
> >> And, of course, one must treasure the Worst Conceivable Cover of _The
> >> Door Into Fire_. (Go ahead, conceive of it. It's worse.)
> >
> > Aarrghh! I remember that one! (I suppose you're refering to the
> >Methuen edition, right?) It's one of the few books I've actually bought
> >a new copy of, because of the cover. (The Bluejay edition.) What was it
> >with Methuen in the late 70s / early 80s? Because the cover for their
> >edition of Cherryh's _The Fires of Azeroth_ was even more horrible than
> >_Door_ , unlikely as this may seem. (I bought a copy of the reprinted
> >DAW edition to replace this one .)
>
> The DAW covers for Morgaine are the same kinda blah ones as in the little
> boxes on the omnibus, right? How much worse was this other cover?
I haven't looked at the omnibus so I don't know if they are the
same. The originals were early Michael Whelan covers, and not too bad in
a generic fantasy late 1970s kind of way. At least Morgain and Vanye was
recognisably themselves on them.
The Methuen cover was so much worse than DAW's that it's
different to imagine them existing in the same universe. I mean it!
Imagine a completely naked *very* busty blonde, with a huge sword
leaping screaming at a monster that looked to be a cross between a bat
and a lizard, set against a background of erupting volcanoes. What has
that got to do with what happens in _Fires of Azeroth_, you ask?
Absolutely nothing of course, but that didn't stop Methuen from using
it. Amazing really. (But I'm suddenly struck by DOUBT. Perhaps the
publisher wasn't Methuen, but instead somebody else that begins with an
M. Hm, how do I check? I got rid of those two books years ago. Help!)
For the sake of balance I'll add another of my favourite
editions to this post. I have a three-volume set of LeGuin's first three
Earthsea books in a Bantam pocket edition from the late 1970s. They have
very nice wrap-around covers with slightly stylizied artwork in muted
colours with grey and beige dominating. They also have small b/w
drawings at the beginning of each chapter. (By Ruth Robbins in the first
volume, and Gail Garraty in the other two. No artist name mentioned for
the covers though, which is a pity.)
Ninni Pettersson
Yes, there are line drawings in that edition of _The Hobbit_
(which I don't own yet due to financial reasons). And I agree with you
about Alan Lee. His illustrations are the best depictions of
Middle-earth, by someone other than Tolkien, that I have ever seen. BUT
I think it's a pity that the text quality of that LotR edition is so
miserably bad. I don't know if it's because it was reprinted from too
well-worn plates, or if they photographed the text from an earlier
edition, but the result in any case is a very smudgy and uneven print.
So I simply felt forced to buy the next paper back edition :-)
(This is the 1997 HarperCollins boxed set, containing both _The Hobbit_
and the three volumes of LotR.) The text is now completely reset, errors
and misprints that has accumulated over the years have finally been
removed and/or corrected, and as a bonus you get Tolkien's original
sketches on the LotR covers *and* an edition of _The Hobbit_ with
Tolkien's original cover, line drawings and colour plates. This is the
one that I use now when I want to read the books. (The edition with
Lee's illustrations I sometimes use in parallell, to look at the
pictures.)
Nancy Lebovitz
Ninni Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> wrote:
>
> So I simply felt forced to buy the next paper back edition :-)
>(This is the 1997 HarperCollins boxed set, containing both _The Hobbit_
>and the three volumes of LotR.) The text is now completely reset, errors
>and misprints that has accumulated over the years have finally been
>removed and/or corrected, and as a bonus you get Tolkien's original
>sketches on the LotR covers *and* an edition of _The Hobbit_ with
>Tolkien's original cover, line drawings and colour plates. This is the
>one that I use now when I want to read the books. (The edition with
>Lee's illustrations I sometimes use in parallell, to look at the
>pictures.)
Am I the only one here who doesn't like the Tolkien illustrations?
When I first saw the paperback edition with Tolkien covers (the one
with white bands at the top of the covers), my first thought was
what is this drab pointlessness? [1]
When I checked and found that they were Tolkien drawings, I thought
that was a reasonable excuse, but I didn't like the covers any better.
Aside from my imprint on the Remmington covers, I imagine Middle-earth
as having brilliant sunlight and emphatic darkness. The grass is at
least as green as it gets around here, and probably much greener.
[1] That's my best verbal approximation for a feeling of revulsion
that can't be expressed with any precision in ASCII.
Nancy Lebovitz
Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <8ti3if$p...@netaxs.com>
> na...@unix3.netaxs.com "Nancy Lebovitz" writes:
>
(Tolkien drawings)
>
>> Aside from my imprint on the Remmington covers, I imagine Middle-earth
>> as having brilliant sunlight and emphatic darkness. The grass is at
>> least as green as it gets around here, and probably much greener.
>
>It is so much an English landscape writ large, all of it, that I just
>don't understand that as a reaction.
>
I could be mistaken, but I've always assumed that the northern Delaware/
Philadelphia landscape isn't all that different from Britain except for
having more extreme temperatures (both hot and cold) for part of the year.
Other than that, it's mildly hilly, and fairly damp. There are probably
more sunny or partly sunny days than completely overcast, but there's
a good mix of both. The weather never makes a serious attempt at killing
people.
When I say "brilliant sunlight", I'm not talking about Italy or southern
California. Around here, you might want sunglasses on the brighter days
if you're susceptible to glare, but sunglasses aren't a necessity of life.
However, we're talking about something a lot brighter than those vague
grey-green colored pencils (?) that Tolkien used. Weren't the riders of
Rohan charging across a very bright green field? Wasn't it sunny most of
the time in the Shire?
And the darks in the text were really dark, and I'm sure that Sauron's
eye was quite a bright red.
However, the real answer is probably found in Tolkien's "On Fairy Stories",
where he talks about fairy stories drawing on one's early basic memories
of tree and hill and bread and fire.
I'm just realizing now that my idea of a green field isn't really based
in meadows or pasture--it's the tended lawns of Wilmington suburbs.
Ghu knows what Middle-earth is like for someone who grew up in Colorado.
Chris Camfield
Oh, yes. I first read the Hobbit (or rather, had it read to me) from
my father's pb copy, with Tolkien's drawing of Smaug over Laketown on
the front. Most portayals of Smaug by other artists just don't seem
right.
Chris
Chris Camfield
wrote:
>I really loved the Avon paperback editions of Zelazny's Amber books
>(and the others) with the iconic illustrations by Ron Walotsky. Some
>very smart person decided to make the rest of each of the cover black,
>so the art really stood out. Except _Doorways in the Sand_, which was
>purple for some reason.
Yes, very cool. Contrast these with the 1990s paperbacks, with Fabio
clones for Corwin. Dreadful!
Chris
Mike Kozlowski
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix3.netaxs.com> wrote:
>Am I the only one here who doesn't like the Tolkien illustrations?
Nope. I think they look amateurish -- as a cover artist, Tolkien made a
great writer.
--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/
Scott Schwartz
places that I've visited....If the Delaware Valley is the Shire, then
the redwood groves in the Bay Area are Lorien. Moria is located
either just west of Boulder (facing the wrong direction!), or
somewhere in the mountains between State College and Harrisburg
(depending on my mood, and what the traffic is like). Not sure where
Rivendell is.
Trent Goulding
[Tolkien's physical landscapes]
>However, the real answer is probably found in Tolkien's "On Fairy Stories",
>where he talks about fairy stories drawing on one's early basic memories
>of tree and hill and bread and fire.
>
>I'm just realizing now that my idea of a green field isn't really based
>in meadows or pasture--it's the tended lawns of Wilmington suburbs.
>
>Ghu knows what Middle-earth is like for someone who grew up in Colorado.
<raises hand> Speaking!
I've always had very vivid impressions of the landscape of
Middle-earth; it's one of the keys of the book to me. Part of it is
the impressionable age at which I first read it (10-11 yrs. old, as
I recall). I can't think of another book whose physical atmosphere
sunk so deeply into my awareness that early in life. The opening
chapters of _The Dark is Rising_ might come close...
The funny thing is, when I first read it, I'd never been anywhere
near England (still haven't, for that matter), or even outside the
western U.S. That's a great quote you have up there about stories
tapping early memories, because I think it's certainly true in my
case. At that age, I had been camping and hiking, in Colorado,
Wyoming, and eastern Idaho, and had a very clear notion of mountains
and countryside and wilderness. Query how close that is to actual
*English* countryside; perhaps not very. But nevertheless, the
greens and blues and shadows and so forth mapped fairly seamlessly
onto my personal sensory library, and made the tale much more vivid.
As to the paintings, I'm partial to the Tolkien covers simply
because that's the edition I have from way back--the poor, tattered
pb dears are falling apart now, alas. Otherwise, it's an artistic
style I don't particularly care for.
And this may be heresy in light of opinions expressed in the thread
already, but I don't like the Alan Lee interpretation all that much.
He has a few paintings that I think are very good, but the bulk of
his Tolkien work leaves me largely unmoved.
--
Trent Goulding goul...@2001.law.ucla.edu
D. Gascoyne
of the _Hobbit_ with the illustrations by Tove Jansson (of Moomin fame).
I think they're totally wrong, but also totally right, if that makes any
sense.
Debbie
--
D. Gascoyne
English Instructor, Camosun College
PhD Candidate, University of Victoria
"hoc in loco praecantato summa in Silva sito puellus et Ursus suus
semper ludet"
D. Gascoyne
>
> In article <1eja6mu.1l0...@d212-151-237-154.swipnet.se>,
> Ninni Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> wrote:
> >
> > So I simply felt forced to buy the next paper back edition :-)
> >(This is the 1997 HarperCollins boxed set, containing both _The Hobbit_
> >and the three volumes of LotR.) The text is now completely reset, errors
> >and misprints that has accumulated over the years have finally been
> >removed and/or corrected, and as a bonus you get Tolkien's original
> >sketches on the LotR covers *and* an edition of _The Hobbit_ with
> >Tolkien's original cover, line drawings and colour plates. This is the
> >one that I use now when I want to read the books. (The edition with
> >Lee's illustrations I sometimes use in parallell, to look at the
> >pictures.)
>
> Am I the only one here who doesn't like the Tolkien illustrations?
>
themselves. His hobbits looks too much like small scale men to me. On
the other hand, I love his drawings of Smaug. I used to have an early
Unwin paperback, grey cover with death of Smaug on it, but LENT it to
someone and never got it back. (gentle hints uncovered the awful truth
that she had given it to someone else - some people have no idea of
books as valued personal treasures). I also like the Pauline Baynes
covers and decorations on the Canadian paperback edition. The only ones
I've seen that I absolutely hated were the Brothers Hildebrant. All
that golden light and bright blue skies. Ugh.
D. Gascoyne
>
> Omixochitl <omixo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ninni Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> wrote in
> > <1ej89dj.cx...@d212-151-249-246.swipnet.se>:
>
> For the sake of balance I'll add another of my favourite
> editions to this post. I have a three-volume set of LeGuin's first three
> Earthsea books in a Bantam pocket edition from the late 1970s. They have
> very nice wrap-around covers with slightly stylizied artwork in muted
> colours with grey and beige dominating. They also have small b/w
> drawings at the beginning of each chapter. (By Ruth Robbins in the first
> volume, and Gail Garraty in the other two. No artist name mentioned for
> the covers though, which is a pity.)
Yes, I like those too. I have #'s 2 and 3 in that edition, and also a
uniform edition of _The Wind's Twelve Quarters_. I'd quite like to have
_Wizard_ as well to make up the set, but treasure my old Puffin. I also
treasure my copy of _Tehanu_, hardcover 1st, that I managed to get
signed.
Nancy Lebovitz
Kate Nepveu <kate....@yale.edu> wrote:
>J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk (Jo Walton) wrote:
>> In article <8ti3if$p...@netaxs.com>
>> na...@unix3.netaxs.com "Nancy Lebovitz" writes:
>
>> > as having brilliant sunlight and emphatic darkness. The grass is at
>> > least as green as it gets around here, and probably much greener.
>
If so, only indirectly. Tolkien gave me the impression that things in
Middle-earth were very definite and sharp-edged and emphatic, and for
me, that includes grass being very green.
>
>> It is so much an English landscape writ large, all of it, that I just
>> don't understand that as a reaction.
>
>I imagine this is a visceral thing--once you see it as an English
>landscape, you can't not see it that way, but if you started out
>seeing it as fantasyland of some variety or another, that's how you
>see it?
>
Sidetrack: I bet there's a niche for a book of carefully chosen
photographs of the English landscape with appropriate Tolkien
quotes, and/or an edition of LOTR with the same photographs.
Andrew Plotkin
> my favorite edition is
> the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a passage
> or a piece of textevd.
Is "textevd" a new coinage, or a recent import from another newsgroup,
or have I just missed it previous?
Kate Nepveu
> > my favorite edition is
> > the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a passage
> > or a piece of textevd.
> Is "textevd" a new coinage, or a recent import from another newsgroup,
> or have I just missed it previous?
I have no idea where I got it; sorry.
aRJay
Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> writes
> The Methuen cover was so much worse than DAW's that it's
>different to imagine them existing in the same universe. I mean it!
>Imagine a completely naked *very* busty blonde, with a huge sword
>leaping screaming at a monster that looked to be a cross between a bat
>and a lizard, set against a background of erupting volcanoes. What has
>that got to do with what happens in _Fires of Azeroth_, you ask?
>Absolutely nothing of course, but that didn't stop Methuen from using
>it. Amazing really. (But I'm suddenly struck by DOUBT. Perhaps the
>publisher wasn't Methuen, but instead somebody else that begins with an
>M. Hm, how do I check? I got rid of those two books years ago. Help!)
From the back cover:-
A Methuen Paperback
Cover Illustration Alan Craddock
Jesper Svedberg
> In article <1eja6mu.1l0...@d212-151-237-154.swipnet.se>,
> Ninni Pettersson <see_sig...@email.xx> wrote:
> >
> > So I simply felt forced to buy the next paper back edition :-)
> >(This is the 1997 HarperCollins boxed set, containing both _The Hobbit_
> >and the three volumes of LotR.) The text is now completely reset, errors
> >and misprints that has accumulated over the years have finally been
> >removed and/or corrected, and as a bonus you get Tolkien's original
> >sketches on the LotR covers *and* an edition of _The Hobbit_ with
> >Tolkien's original cover, line drawings and colour plates. This is the
> >one that I use now when I want to read the books. (The edition with
> >Lee's illustrations I sometimes use in parallell, to look at the
> >pictures.)
>
> Am I the only one here who doesn't like the Tolkien illustrations?
Hm, can't say I've seen them, but I've seen the edition of _The Hobbit_
illustrated by Tove Jansson which was pretty cool, but Gollum just didn't
look right and it wasn't really my idea of Tolkien. The LotR
illustrations made by the Queen of Denmark was pretty interesting as
well. Lastly, I also saw a picture picturing some part of Middleearth the
other day made by H. R. Giger, that was, not surprisingly, pretty weird
(but cool).
// Jesper Svedberg
Ninni Pettersson
> Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
> >
> > Am I the only one here who doesn't like the Tolkien illustrations?
>
> I like his landscapes, but dislike his pictures of the Hobbits
> themselves. His hobbits looks too much like small scale men to me.
But that is what they're supposed to look like according to
Tolkien himself. (Apart from the hairy feet of course.) They are
supposed to look like perfectly proportioned humans in all but size.
(Though personally I think his illustrations of Bilbo aren't only rather
unlike this ideal, but also rather crude compared to his landscapes.)
Ninni Pettersson
> In article <1eja5k8.y4...@d212-151-237-154.swipnet.se>
> see_sig...@email.xx "Ninni Pettersson" writes:
>
> > The Methuen cover was so much worse than DAW's that it's
> > different to imagine them existing in the same universe. I mean it!
> > Imagine a completely naked *very* busty blonde, with a huge sword
> > leaping screaming at a monster that looked to be a cross between a bat
> > and a lizard, set against a background of erupting volcanoes. What has
> > that got to do with what happens in _Fires of Azeroth_, you ask?
> > Absolutely nothing of course, but that didn't stop Methuen from using
> > it. Amazing really. (But I'm suddenly struck by DOUBT. Perhaps the
> > publisher wasn't Methuen, but instead somebody else that begins with an
> > M. Hm, how do I check? I got rid of those two books years ago. Help!)
>
> It was Methuen. And it really was that bad.
Thank you! I was fairly certain that it was Methuen, but when
that sudden doubt strikes me I usually check if I'm right (or not), but
this was of course impossible in this case. (But I never doubted my
memory of that horrible cover. In fact I doubt if I ever will be able to
forget it.)
William Clifford
Mine has Bilbo talking to Smaug on the cover. It is the main part of
another painting of his called _Conversation with Smaug_. It's a great
picture. There's Smaug wrapped around a large pile of treasure. His
eyes are sleepy, smoke rises from his nostrils. Around the gold pile
is what looks like a puddle of oil. Scattered about in the oil are
skulls, a sword, a shield, a full skeleton and a goblet. And to one
side is a shadow shaped like Bilbo taking a bow.
I didn't see the whole thing of this painting until many years later
when I got the big green edition from Houghton Mifflin edition with
all of the illustrations AND all of the color paintings. Very nice.
--
William Clifford
wo...@yahoo.com
"Well, I'm back," he said.
thomas...@bluetail.com
Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
> Kate Nepveu <kate....@yale.edu> wrote:
> > my favorite edition is
> > the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a passage
> > or a piece of textevd.
>
> Is "textevd" a new coinage, or a recent import from another newsgroup,
> or have I just missed it previous?
My guess was "textual evidence".
Thomas
--
Thomas Lindgren thomas...@bluetail.com
Alteon Websystems Sweden http://www.bluetail.com
"The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the
bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle
everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere."
-- Communist Manifesto
Kate Nepveu
> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
> > Kate Nepveu <kate....@yale.edu> wrote:
> > > my favorite edition is
> > > the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a passage
> > > or a piece of textevd.
> > Is "textevd" a new coinage, or a recent import from another newsgroup,
> > or have I just missed it previous?
> My guess was "textual evidence".
Yes, that's what it means; someone has reminded me I probably got it
from the Bujold mailing list.
atholbrose
>Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
>collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
>thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
>full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
This is the edition of the Hobbit that the local library had. It wasn't
the first version of the Hobbit I read, but it is the one I read to my
mother.
Michael R N Dolbear
<kqarvssu79m81gb70...@4ax.com>...
> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> wrote:
> > Kate Nepveu <kate....@yale.edu> wrote:
>
> > > my favorite edition is
> > > the one I'm most familiar with--makes it easier to hunt down a
passage
> > > or a piece of textevd.
>
> > Is "textevd" a new coinage, or a recent import from another
newsgroup,
> > or have I just missed it previous?
>
> I have no idea where I got it; sorry.
I saw it first in various mailing lists, eg (last update August 19,
1998)
http://www.ling.udel.edu/hyde/pers/misty/newbiefest.html
"textev" is also in use, but a web search shows fewer occurances but
one dated to January 11 1997.
--
Mike D
Andrew C. Wheeler
> It got me to thinking about prefered editions. I like the
> HC edition of _The Enemy Stars_, the old one without the 1970s
> revision. Just fond memories. Same with the original cover of
> a Fred Pohl, _Age of the Pussyfoot_ vs the later Del Rey edition,
> whose cover I hated. The silly thing is, I am ore likely to prefer
> one edition over another simply because that was the one I first
> read rather than because the prefered edition has better paper
> than the other or some other rational reason [Except for Lancer
> Books, every one of which I had was poorly bound and got replaced
> if possible].
The big one for me was the late '70s Avon editions of Zelazny's books
(especially the Amber series) with those mostly-black covers and the
great small illustrations by Ron Walotsky. There was something that just
said to me: this is waht a Zelazny book _looks like_.
I actually imprinted so hard that, years later, when I was doing a
one-volume edition of "The First Chronicles of Amber," I made my art
director use Walotsky for the cover and replicate that same look as much
as possible. Hey, it may not be the reason _most_ people go into
publishing, but...
--
Andrew Wheeler
Editor, Science Fiction Book Club
business e-mail: andrew....@bookspan.com
winner, World's Most Boring .sig: 1998, 1999, 2000 (Emeritus)
William December Starr
Omixochitl <omixo...@hotmail.com> said:
> Speaking of internal artwork in color...I forgot which book it was
> even though I saw the pics on eBay, but there was a children's book
> from 1900 or so with glow-in-the-dark illustrations that had radium in
> the ink. Anyone here know the title?
"A Child's Book of Genetic Mutations"?
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
William December Starr
na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) said:
> I'm imprinted on the Remmington covers (the blue-purple-red series)
> for Lord of the Rings, and I've never seen better covers for the
> Skylark and Lensmen series than the brightly colored Gaughan semi-
> abstracts. Besides, you have to admire someone who represents space
> as bright pink with large red dots.
Admire him, or just his drugs?
mstemper - psc . com
>In article <8tdk8n$g...@netaxs.com>, na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
>>
>> and I've never seen better covers for the
>> Skylark and Lensmen series than the brightly colored Gaughan semi-
>> abstracts. Besides, you have to admire someone who represents space
>> as bright pink with large red dots.
>
>changes on every one). Mine are so cracked & torn though (sob!)
Are you talking about the (roughly) 1970 printings? Until I saw this post,
I never even realized that these were by Gaughan.
My preferred editions of the Lensmen and Skylark series are his previous
covers for Pyramid -- roughly 1967. They're the less abstract, extremely
pulpy covers.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Science major: "Why does it work?"
Engineering major: "How does it work?"
Accounting major: "How much will it cost?"
Liberal Arts major: "Do you want fries with that?"
Nancy Lebovitz
Michael Stemper <mstemper @ siemens - psc . com> wrote:
>In article <8tf0eh$ski$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Bill Miller <wbmi...@ghg.net> writes:
>>In article <8tdk8n$g...@netaxs.com>, na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
>>>
>>> and I've never seen better covers for the
>>> Skylark and Lensmen series than the brightly colored Gaughan semi-
>>> abstracts. Besides, you have to admire someone who represents space
>>> as bright pink with large red dots.
>>
>>I like those Pyramid edition Lensmen covers too (the color of space
>>changes on every one). Mine are so cracked & torn though (sob!)
>
>Are you talking about the (roughly) 1970 printings? Until I saw this post,
>I never even realized that these were by Gaughan.
>
>My preferred editions of the Lensmen and Skylark series are his previous
>covers for Pyramid -- roughly 1967. They're the less abstract, extremely
>pulpy covers.
>
Susana Serras Pereira
"Aaron P. Brezenski" <tina...@primenet.com> wrote in message
news:8tg83s$efq$1...@nnrp2.phx.gblx.net...
>
> Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
> collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
> thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
> full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
>
> don't know when the thing was published, and there are more versions of "The
> Hobbit" out there than you can shake a stick at.
>
> You can debate the merits of the movie, or even the art *from* the movie,
> but I have to say it'd be nice to be able to have that edition today so I
> could read it to my daughter, who's still somewhat enamored of books with
> pictures all over the place...
I have that edition, and have loved it to bits, literally - it's
a very badly put together weird-size paperback, and all the pages
are falling out. But it is lovely, and reading it was sooo much
better than seeing the actual movie.
Here's the info you might need to find it: the title on the cover
is "J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit or there and back again", and it
calls itself "The deluxe edition of the world's most beloved fantasy
With over 230 full-color illustrations from the great animated film
spectacle by Arthur Rankin, Jr., and Jules Bass". A modest little
thing, you see.
It was published by Ballantine, in September 1978 (the first edition,
mine is the third printing, November 1978) with ISBN 0-345-27711-2.
It's 220 pages, and (wow) looking at the list of illustrators for the
first time in years I see Charles Vess' name, and I can kind of see it
in places, the "Men of Lake town" look distinctly Vessian. This is
enormously cool, and I thank you for the opportunity to find this out.
I hope you find it, and your daughter likes it.
Susana, who just looked at the pictures for a long time
and thinks this book might have been one of the
things that made it so easy to get English all
at once a few years later
Nancy Lebovitz
Susana Serras Pereira <ni...@netzero.pt> wrote:
>
>I have that edition, and have loved it to bits, literally - it's
>a very badly put together weird-size paperback, and all the pages
>are falling out. But it is lovely, and reading it was sooo much
>better than seeing the actual movie.
>
>Here's the info you might need to find it: the title on the cover
>is "J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit or there and back again", and it
>calls itself "The deluxe edition of the world's most beloved fantasy
>With over 230 full-color illustrations from the great animated film
>spectacle by Arthur Rankin, Jr., and Jules Bass". A modest little
>thing, you see.
>
>It was published by Ballantine, in September 1978 (the first edition,
>mine is the third printing, November 1978) with ISBN 0-345-27711-2.
>It's 220 pages, and (wow) looking at the list of illustrators for the
>first time in years I see Charles Vess' name, and I can kind of see it
>in places, the "Men of Lake town" look distinctly Vessian. This is
>enormously cool, and I thank you for the opportunity to find this out.
>
>I hope you find it, and your daughter likes it.
>
>
To find them, search on
hobbit rankin
in the "all" field.
Some of the copies include a record.
Gavin Williams
<ni...@netzero.pt> wrote:
>
>"Aaron P. Brezenski" <tina...@primenet.com> wrote in message
>news:8tg83s$efq$1...@nnrp2.phx.gblx.net...
>>
>> Back in the 80s, a soccer-buddy of mine had a dad with a Tolkien
>> collection, and one item I was totally taken with was an inch-and-a-half
>> thick unabridged (as far as I could tell) version of "The Hobbit" with
>> full-color illustrations on every page from the Rankin-Bass movie.
When I was a child, our prized possession was a full length version of
"The Hobbit" on 8 (IIRC) vinyl LPs read by Nicol Williamson. The
voices and characterisations he creates are all completely unique to
each person and I can still remember certain phrases and accents
("struck by lightning, struck by lightning")
I have yet to find *any* production including the BBC radio4 [1]
dramatisation which goes anywhere *near* the wonder and magic of this
version.
If *anyone* knows where it can be found I would be thrilled skinny to
hear.
Gavin
[1] I was especially disappointed with the character of Thorin
Oakenshield in that version, he was not deep and strong enough. [2]
[2] The R4 dramatisation of LOTR is OTOH the best dramatisation I have
heard of that work.
--
Remove the blocks from my name to reply
Jo'Asia
> Some editions are flat-out superior. I have a copy of _The Neverending
> Story_ which has the two narrative levels in red and green, instead
> of plain and italic. This is better because italic has a "meta"
> connotation, whereas red and green are purely different.
I think it's the way the german original edition ws printed and other
editors took it from there. The new (second) polish editon is also red and
green.
Jo'Asia
--
http://framzeta.art.pl Joanna Slupek http://rassun.art.pl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm from SF and I'm okay, I read all night and write all day (Robson)
To write me replace 'rasun' with 'rassun' in my e-mail