Conference noted::sf

I too, like Boris' work.  I have a few paperbacks with some of his illustrations
on them.  His drawings often illustrate half-naked barbaric men and women 
performing heroic deeds, fighting giant lizards or other enormous creatures.
I was also impressed with his calendar.  However, I don't know if I want
to hang it in my office.  :^)

Mike_L

    
    He did a "Mythology" calendar this year, which is quite nice.
    
    I've always like Boris Vallejo's work, although I always thought
    he put too much light in his scenes, which is why I usually prefer
    Frazetta, although I don't think he works anymore (did he die or
    something?)
    
    DFW

    
       Frank Frazetta is very much alive and still painting. I have
    been to his museum the last 2 years straight and have purchased
    some of his prints. I also have talked to his wife on a number
    of occasions and she says he was ill a couple of years ago but is
    fine now. He had some sort of Thyroid problems and was at the Mayo
    Clinic for some time.
      This past summer when I was there, She had a new series of paint-
    ings of a series called The Death Dealer. Fantastic! the best yet
    from this man! They will appear on books of the same title this
    year. He also has a bronze that will be unveiled and on disply in
    New York City this year. 
      Even though he is in his 60's he is still going strong. For all
    of you fantasy art lovers I highly recommend if ever in East Strouds-
    berg Penn. that a visit to his museum is a must! Let me just say
    that all the pictures of his work do not do him justice. The original
    oils are so real that its like stepping into his world of fantasy!
                                              
                                          mike (Frazetta and Boris lover)
    
                                                                     
    
    

    Well, I'm a big fan of Michael Whelan, but he's more SF than fantasy,
    though he's into both.  Incredible detail...  He's done the
    Killashandra series, Asimov's Robots, McCaffrey's dragonriders,
    etc, etc, etc.
    
    Willie

    Frazetta, s�.
    Whelan, s�.
    Boris, no.
    
    I have enjoyed some Boris paintings, but there's something too
    polished about them that drives me batty. There's a sameness to
    them that goes beyond subject matter, and a polish that makes
    them look like they were stamped out of a machine. I have the
    same problem with the Brothers Hildebrandt and Rowena Morrill.
    
    I prefer the more Romantic school of fantasy art, such as that by
    Bob Gould and Tom Canty. Darrell Sweet is another favorite.
    
    --- jerry

    I'm with you, Jerry!
    
    It doesn't seem right, somehow, that the Elven Queen Galadriel looks
    more like a gemanic peasant girl than a somewhat ethereal magical
    creature!  (I mean, would people -- or hobbits -- automatically
    respond to the Hildebrandt characters as they do in the writings
    of Tolkien?  I think not!)
    
    And, at the risk of sounding prudish or stuck-up, I'm a bit put
    off by the "bodies-beautiful" nearly-naked school of sensationalistic
    sf graphics.  I mean, where does it say in the text/s "she was nearly
    naked and bursting out of her tiger skins in a way most unsuitable
    for the winter climate of her world..."???  Puh-leeze -- give me
    some credit for common sense!
    
    Sherry

    But Sherry, who COULD craft an appropriate image of Galadriel? 
  I mean, she is so beyond beauty, majesty, etc, that humans (ie, artists)
  probably couldn't get her right no matter what!
    
    				=ELB=

>    I mean, where does it say in the text/s "she was nearly
>    naked and bursting out of her tiger skins in a way most unsuitable
>    for the winter climate of her world..."???  Puh-leeze -- give me
>    some credit for common sense!

	Well, I hate to disillusion you, but there are a number of F/SF authors
out there who do write things like that.  I guess that's the kind of stuff that
sells.  It doesn't show a great deal of common sense,  But a (probably) 
predominantly male audience will go for that sort of stuff.  Nearly the same 
audience for the artwork as well -- so, scantily clad beauties is what we get,
'cause that's what sells.  No one said the authors/artists don't have any 
common sense.

	I do agree with you that this gratuitous showing of female flesh is 
sort of nonsensical (did I spell that correctly?).  I aslo find that many of
the authors that write the clothes off of their female characters do not write
very well.

	-Jonathan

    
    
    
    
    Sex sells, and good book covers sell books.
    
    It's senseless to argue over it. But I think most of the his women
    are too plump looking. My taste.
    

    IF you ever get the chance to glance at Boris' book "Mirage" 
    (caution, it is chock-full of nudity and sexuality, tastefully done)
    -do so.
    
    Some of his art is incredibly realistic, and each picture is
    accompanied by a poem by his wife Doris (Boris and Doris, jeez...)
    and I think they're pretty decent.
    
    an *expensive* book ($12.95 or so) - but good.
    
    -Jody
    
    p.s.  I don't like Frazetta, but I do like Michael Whelan, the Brothers
    Hildebrandt, Rowena Morrill, Ken Macklin, Sidney Sime (very obscure),
    Maxfield Parrish.....
    

       Along the lines of knowing your audience, it must be mostly male
       to judge by most book covers, but then check out the ads in
       "computer world", how many operators do you know who wear dresses
       and high heels like they do in some ads?

       I also have to admit that I do sometimes buy a book by it's cover.
       liesl

    re:.8
    
    � Well, I hate to disillusion you, but there are a number of F/SF
    authors out there who do write things like that. �
    
    True, but irrelevant. The number of such authors are far less than
    the number of authors who don't but still have covers on their
    books that imply it.
    
    --- jerry

    Re .12 (Jerry):
    
    Coupla points --
    
    Seminude women (and occasionally men) on the covers of books is
    just a continuation of an old, established, and venerable practice
    that came into its own in the golden age of the SF pulps.  The
    _Startling Stories_ or _Thrilling Wonder Stories_ that didn't have
    a Nubile Young Thing showing vast expanses of smooth, tanned epidermis
    was such a rarity as being worth buying just for that.  Even
    _Imagination_ got into that particular act.  That paperback book
    publishers (in some ways, the logical successors to the pulp magazines)
    are doing the same shouldn't be a bit surprising.
    
    Naturally, if it weren't for different tastes, there wouldn't be
    horseraces.  _Mirage_ is rather entertaining.
    
    In order to special-order my copy of the 1989 calendar, though,
    the Paper Store has a couple more on its shelves, if anyone in the
    Maynard area is looking for one.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    
    

    re:.13
    
    That's all very well and true (and something I already knew),
    but those were simpler times, when attitudes towards such things
    weren't as they are now. There are lots of things from the pulp
    era that were regarded as perfectly normal states of affair then
    that are thought of as sexist, racist, or just plain stupid now.
    
    --- jerry

    Re .14 (Jerry):
    
    >That's all very well and true (and something I already knew),
    >but those were simpler times, when attitudes towards such things
    >weren't as they are now. ...
     
    I never believed that looking at pictures of highly attractive members
    of the opposite sex (Boris draws seminude men, too) is something
    that has been subject to attitudinal change.
    
    Jerry,. my observation was a simple one: it's not _surprising_ that
    a tradition, even one that might be sexist, racist, or just plain
    stupid, isn't carried on.  There's a lot of cultural inertia, after
    all; and compared to some practices that are currently around in
    society, male-and-female pinups is hardly a serious one, even as
    book covers.  Also recall that the majority of stuff being written
    (including SF/F stuff) is highly forgettable, in accordance with
    Sturgeon's Law.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    
    

>    I do agree with you that this gratuitous showing of female flesh is
>    sort of nonsensical 

    There is alot of equal time given.  Most of the scantily clad females
    are standing next to guys wearing nothing but short loincloths. 

    
    
    
    But that's the whole point! It makes sense! It sells!
    

    I have a degree in art.  Not graphic design, but because of my interest
    in art I've read quite a lot about graphics.  I know a bit about
    marketing, and I know a lot about reading and what is logical as
    illustration for bookcovers.  I know, for example, that you try
    to select a very visual, story-telling scene to portray, and if
    possible, one that has reference to a climactic moment.  
    
    BUT (as a reader) it bothers me that on the exceptionally well-done
    cover to "Skeen's Leap", the protagonist is shown to be an Annie
    Lennox look-alike (white-blonde) when the story-line specifically
    mentions her dark hair.  (Subsequent covers correct that.)  It bothers
    me that fictional characters so very often look so damned perfect
    -- I always *liked* the human frailties that showed up in the best
    of them.  I hate the Conan  types and much of Michael Moorcock's
    heroes, but at least they are *supposed* to be Supermen.  But mammaries
    do not a woman make, and how many Dolly Parton builds do YOU run
    into on a daily basis?  And if you did, what would you guess the
    chances are that the aforementioned accouterments would not get
    in the way of expert swordsmanship or gymnastic prowess?  All I'm
    saying is that when sex is ALL that sells, why buy?  (I started
    a Playboy press SF book once.  I read about 20 pages and tossed
    it into the fireplace where it belongs!)  Too many illustrators,
    even the ones with technical ability like some mentioned in this
    note, think they are Vargas.  I like Vargas better -- he made no
    pretenses about his motives.  
    
    And for those of you who say this sort of sexixm is unimportant --
    wise up!  It's these little "meaningless" subtle examples that 
    pervade our society that are EXACTLY where the real problem lies -- 
    they form a subconscious basis for all sorts of bigotry, and are too 
    "insignificant" to be considered a big threat.  Do you tell "NIGGER"
    jokes?  Well, buying a book for a painting of a big-breasted woman 
    on the cover when being a big-breasted woman is irrelevant to the
    story is just as sexist as jokes like that are racist.  
    
    As for portraying Galadriel, I've seen other attempts (don't know
    the artists) that were better than the Hildebrandts.  There is even
    a collector's doll that's out now that is better than their vision.
    Taller, a bit thinner, a bit paler, soft glow around, more angular,
    more regal... remember she's elvish, not human -- an illustration
    should emphasize the difference.
    
    And for my final harangue, I'm sorry, I don't recall many loin-clothed
    men except for the Conon series which I don't buy.  I'll scan my
    several hundred fantasy covers tonight for a refresher, but as I
    recall the men portrayed are usually in armor or full lenghth robes
    and the women are nearly always at least 44D's, usually with cleavage
    showing and often wearing a Neanderthal bikini.  If I were an active
    warrior-woman, I, for one, would PROTECT myself!  But men tend to
    make men-characters sensible and woman characters wise old crones
    or fantasy-heroines, usually with a missing cog when it comes to
    attire!
    
    (The women authors I read, at least the examples I can recall offhand,
    tend to dress their characters appropriately for what they are doing.
    McCaffrey's dragonriders wear appropriately warm outfits for going
    "between", but are capable of seductive attire if seduction is the
    plan... and *that* makes sense!)
    
    (I'd like to see NEW statistics about the demographics of fantasy/sf
    readership -- I think the old story about a nearly all-male readership
    -- and buyership -- is outdated, especially for fantasy.  And we
    women, I presume to generalize, would like to see some believability
    in our artwork.  That said, I will say that many sf artists do have
    breathtaking imagination and technical ability, and only a few little
    corrections would make them "perfect"!)
    
    Sherry
    

    re .18
    
    If you know a little bit about marketing, you must realize that
    a cover is designed to catch the interest of a passer-by and cause
    an impulse point of purchase sale.  You must also realize that 90%
    of all impulse buyers are *male*.  The covers you are seeing are
    not designed to attract the attention of active SF&F readers.  They
    are designed to catch the eye of the casual browser.
    
    Yes, these covers are sexist and unrealistic.  Most artists do not
    read the book for which they are doing the cover art for.  They
    are usually given a story synopsis.  You must remember that covers
    are commisioned at about the time the book premise is purchased
    by the publisher.  This is why you sometimes do not get an accurate
    cover portrayal of a character within a story.
    
    As far as portrayals of well known characters go...  The artist
    does not always capture the idea of what the author was trying to
    convey.  The artist is portraying his/her idea of what the character
    is supposed to look like.  For example, Anne McCaffrey is not pleased
    with Michael Whelan's portrayals of the dragons on any of the
    _Dragonrider_ series books.
    
    In short (as if I can be short after this), the artist is not trying
    to be accurate, he is trying to make an eye-catching cover.  Boris,
    Frazetta, Tim Hildebrandt, Rownea Morrill all use somewhat heroic
    proportions to the characters they draw.  This is to catch the eye,
    it is probably not intended as an insult to the entire male/female
    sex.  Please do not take it as such.

    Geez--every time I decide to add a new note, I see all these familiar
    faces--er, words, rather.   :D
    
    Anyway, in regards to 44Ds bursting out of tight bikini's--yeah,
    those covers are there to sell the book.  Yeah, it's a "tradition"
    of sorts.  Yeah, I guess it could be considered sexist, but of course,
    so could Playboy, et al, but they are around, too.  Sure, I don't
    see many Frazetta/Boris women walking around, but I don't see
    Centerfolds everyday either (where do they hide this women?).  And,
    as a woman myself, I certainly don't look like that.  They are all
    paintings, really, idealism to an extreme--and a lot like comic
    book heroes or heroines.  After all, if YOU were chasing bad 'uns
    around your city, would you be wearing three inch stilleto heels
    and a skin tight, colorful outfit?  I'd think not.  I know I'd be
    wearing sweats and some comfy running shoes.   Same as with wearing
    bikinis in snow storm--it ain't real, but then again, it ain't
    supposed to be.
    
    I guess I'm just not as sensitive to that sort of thing as I am
    supposed to be nowadays--besides, as a somewhat talented artist,
    I can/have drawn women like that, and admittedly, they do look good,
    if not real.  It's all a moot point anyway--Vallejo will draw his
    women like perfection personified, and his men like He-Man come
    to life.  Just the way it is....and above all, it sells.
    
    Now, onto the *real* topic--I actually prefer Frazetta over Vallejo
    because Boris's art, after some time, starts to look a like (same
    face, etc).  His muscle men are a bit too bulky for me, anyway (how
    DO they move??)  ;D
    
    Re: .5 or so....
    
    Jerry (gee, you're EVERYWHERE, aren't you?  >;>  ), you mentioned
    some artists that I'm not familiar with and said they were of the
    romantic vein....can you name some books/etc that their art might
    be seen?  I'd like to check them out.
    
      ---kim  (who found this note after reading the ALF note in TV and
     doesn't care how SF/science fiction/sci-fi is spelled....)   ;D

    
    Re 18.
    
       Well, I also have an art degree in Fine Art as well as Graphic
    Design and for your comparisons of Vargas and Boris Vallejo are
    out to lunch. Are you seriously trying to say that you find Boris's
    work to be sexist and Vargas not? You must be joking!
      Another point I have is that if you like reality in your art so
    much why read SF or Fantasy? Why not enjoy it for what it is "FANTASY
    ART".
      I have also worked in marketing and as you should know, many book
    covers or any kind of art can be bought for printing not made specif-
    ically for that book. In other words, the publisher of a book might
    buy the rights to print somebody's art that wasn't made for that
    book at all. Its done all the time. I would say that the amount
    of art that is contracted for a particular book is slim.
      I think this topic is getting to confused with sexism and what
    is fantasy and sf art. Your complaints might belong in Soapbox.
    
                                                             mike
    
    
    

    Let me tell you about some books where they tried the "sex sells"
    theory.  How many of you out there in Easynet-land have read Jean
    Lorrah's Savage Empire series?  The first book had a curvy female
    obviously cast "magic" and some burly guys in torn clothing in the
    foreground (memory hazy, though....).  Sound like real generic fantasy,
    right?
    
    Wrong.  It's got some good things to say about how power corrupts,
    even in a group that's been kept "powerless".  *Sure* it's got magic,
    but not the lightning-bolts-from-the-fingertips kind.
    
    I suppose it did well, because there are 6 books in the series (I
    think...)  But the first three -- their titles and covers make me
    want to read them in brown wrappers!!
    
    My point here is that the art and the packaging of this series would
    have turned me RIGHT OFF, if Jean Lorrah's name hadn't been on the
    book.  How many others did it turn off, too?  And how many people
    picked it up *because* of the cover and title, and found a story
    they were unprepared for.  And turned *them* off, because there
    wasn't any sex (there wasn't, the main characters had to be celibate
    for their powers to work).
    
    It's not just sexism here -- it's bad advertising.
    
    Merry-who-sometimes-puts-down-a-book-for-its-cover
    

    You missed my point entirely.  While it might offend you to see
    the curvacious female magic-user on the cover, and while this may
    not have a damned thing to do with the plot pf the book, the cover
    was picked and/or designed to attract the impulse buyer.  If you'll
    remember, 90% of impulse buys are made by males.

    
    As an aside -
    
    70% of all art purchased by a publisher is commissioned for a specific
    book.
    
    30% is "stock", they buy the rights to use the art work as a book
    cover in (north America, Europe, Asia, Australia, etc), but they
    do not have a book to go with it yet.
    
    Which books get the commissioned artwork - established names, ie,
    authors who are on their second book at least... and did well with
    the first one.
    
    Which books get stock art - first time authors, "pulp" stories,
    etc...
    
    there are exceptions, this is just what I have heard from friends
    and acquaintances who are (or are strugling to become) SF artist.
    
    grins.
    
    clark.

    � Jerry (gee, you're EVERYWHERE, aren't you?  >;>  )... �
    
    Heh, heh. "They seek him here, they seek him there, the Frenchies
    seek him everywhere."
    
    � ...you mentioned some artists that I'm not familiar with and said
    they were of the romantic vein....can you name some books/etc that
    their art might be seen?  I'd like to check them out. �
    
    I mentioned Bob Gould and Tom Canty.
    
    Gould's work can be found mostly on recent editions of almost *any*
    Michael Moorcock book (not all of them, but most of them, especially
    the various Eternal Champion series books published by Berkley).
    
    Some Canty covers include those on the Patricia Kenneally books,
    Jane Yolen's MERLIN'S BOOK, and the books in Ace's "Fairy Tales"
    series (which include Steven Brust's THE SUN, THE MOON, AND THE
    STARS, and Kara Dalkey's THE NIGHTINGALE).
    
    Gould and Canty are to fantasy art what Barry Windsor-Smith and
    P. Craig Russell are to comics art.
    
    I also mentioned Darrell Sweet, who isn't really of the same Romantic
    school, but his cover paintings are among my favorite. He (along
    with Gould and Canty) was one of the select few artists whose covers
    would get me to buy a book no matter what (the one Georgette Heyer
    novel I have in my collection sports a Sweet cover). Sweet dropped
    off that list when he started getting too prolific and seemed to be
    doing covers for every other fantasy novel published by Del Rey Books.
    My single favorite Sweet painting is the cover for Del Rey's mid-70's
    edition of Fletcher Pratt's THE BLUE STAR. It looks like it would
    be more at home on a historical romance novel, but I love it. I
    would *kill* to own the original.
    
    re:.21
    
    � Are you seriously trying to say that you find Boris's work to
    be sexist and Vargas not? �
    
    No, Sherry said nothing of the kind. She said "...[Vargas] made
    no pretenses about his motives". His art was "cheesecake", but it
    was intended to be cheesecake, for an audience that is looking for
    cheesecake. Most fantasy novels would sell to 90% of its buyers
    regardless of how much feminine flesh appeared on the cover. SF/fantasy
    fans are rather notorious for being more concerned with following
    specific authors or specific sub-genres than the average book buyer.
    
    (Besides, Vargas is technically a much more skilled artist than
    Boris.)
    
    re: "what sells" (various)
    
    Re-read what I wrote two paragraphs above. Yes, the rule of thumb
    is: "Get the person to pick the book off of the shelf, and chances
    are you've got 'im". Yes, skin sells, but I'm skeptical about exactly
    how much of a given fantasy book's audience is made up of the "impulse
    buyer". With the exception of places like drugstores and airport
    newsstands, most fantasy books are relegated to the "sf section",
    and a person generally has to be inclined toward fantasy to begin
    with to even notice the book in the first place. Few of the Boris-type
    covered books are the ones that make the best-seller lists and sit
    in a display at the front of the bookstore.
    
    Secondly, while skin sells, it isn't the *only* thing that's eye-
    catching. Back in .5, I mentioned that there are a few Boris covers
    that I really like. The one that leaps most prominently to mind
    is that of a 70's Del Rey edition of Martin Caidin's CYBORG (the
    book upon which the TV show THE SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN was based).
    Boris' cover was astonishing in its design and execution, using,
    for example, a series of "afterimages" to give the sense of Steve
    Austin running super-fast. Extremely eye-catching, and no sex. I
    probably wouldn't have bothered buying that edition of the book
    (I already had a previous edition) if it wasn't for that striking
    cover. My other favorite Boris cover was for another 70's Del Rey
    edition, this time of Edgar Pangborn's DAVY. Now, there *is* a
    "sex scene" on the cover, but it's part of a background montage
    and not the central image of the painting, not to mention that it
    *is* a relevant scene from the novel. Again, I bought that edition
    solely for the cover, and there wasn't any "skin" to speak of.
    
    Likewise, my two favorite Rowena Morrill cover paintings are
    "skinless", though she's another well-entrenched member of the
    "bikini-brigade" school of art. One is a *frightening* cover for
    a circa-1980 Dell edition of Sturgeon's THE DREAMING JEWELS, showing
    a boy holding the most malevolent-looking clown doll you're ever
    going to see (I'm convinced -- sans any hard evidence -- that Tobe
    Hooper and Steven Spielberg's scene in POLTERGEIST with the boy
    and the clown doll was inspired by this cover). The other one, was
    for E. Hoffman Price's oriental fantasy novel from Del Rey, THE
    DEVIL WIVES OF LI FONG.
    
    The trouble with a lot of fantasy publishers is that the covers
    are the purview of the company's Art Director, who generally knows
    little about the sf/fantasy field, and not in the hands of the
    sf/fantasy editor. A major exception is Ballantine/Del Rey, where
    first Ian & Betty Ballantine and later Judy-Lynn and Lester Del
    Rey, had complete control over the sf line.
    
    --- jerry

As long as this note has migrated from just Boris Vallejo to 
alternative fantasy/romantic artists, I'd like to add a few more names 
to the list.

Aside from Thomas Canty who jerry mentioned, I like Victoria Poyser, 
Alicia Austin, Mike Kaluta, Charles Vess and (especially) Lela 
Dowling. Most of these artists primarily work with ink, though will 
colour their work also. While each has drawn semi-clad men or women at times, 
they are definitely not of the Boris/Rowena/Frazetta style. Some men are 
thin and some women have small breasts. Most often the subject is wearing
appropriate clothing. They don't look like they've been pumping iron
and taking steroids. While the styles are different of the above, George 
Barr described Austin's work by saying how she would pencil a full 
anatomical drawing of her subject, add any appropriate clothing and 
then ink only those lines that gave the right feel, erasing the rest. 
What I tend not to like as much in the B/R/F school is that they
seem to ensure every muscle of the anatomy is prominent.

Vess, Poyser, Canty and Austin tend towards romance and historical heroic 
fantasy. Kaluta tends towards futuristic fantasy and Dowling has done 
both (including the art for FUSION, a comic by Eclipse).

For those wanting a good sampling of fantasy art, Paper Tiger has
published quite a few books of fantasy artists, such as: 

Dream Makers- Melvyn Grant, Julek Heller, Chris Moore, Berni 
	Wrightson, Michael Kaluta, Charles Vess

Heroic Dreams- 21 artists, over 150 paintings

The Guide to Fantasy Art Techniques- Jim Burns, Ian Miller, Patrick 
	Woodroffe, Philip Castle, Syd Mead, Chris Foss, Martin Bower,
	Boris Vallejo

Sirens- Chris Achilleos (very much B/R/F)

Beauty and the Beast- Chris Achilleos (again, B/R/F).
	

    Well ....
    
    Okay, what originally prompted the basenote was my purchase of the
    1989 Boris Vallejo fantasy calendar.  It made me recall the many
    pleasant Boris works I'd seen previously (and those who want to
    see Boris pictures without skin, there are several in _The Fantastic
    Art of Boris Vallejo_; he isn't Johnny One-Note by any means).  I
    suspect his works appearing on some S&S fantasy videocassette covers
    were stuff that weren't specifically commissioned for the flicks,
    but which were adapted.  No matter.
    
    There's a problem in doing Fantasy Art: you paint what sells. 
    I would have loved to see how Boris might have handled a cover
    for _Tailchaser's Song_ or _Galactic Patrol_, to take two reasonably
    successful books, but to a certain extent, he's typecast, so the
    majority of his work's going to involve large expanses of skin;
    at least he renders the skin well. 
    
    I wonder how he'd have handled _The Anubis Gates_ ...
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    1.  Who, exactly, says "90%" of sf browsers are male?  In 1988?
        (I know at least as many women who read the genre/s as men.)
    
    2.  Thanks, Jerry, for the defense.  You explained my point nicely.
    
    3.  I don't hate or consider sexist the cover art which accurately
        portrays characters (which are super-hero types usually) as
        written -- just the ones that throw in sex(ism) irrelevantly
        for merchandising reasons.  Among other things, it is often
        false advertising.
    
    4.  I did a surface scan of my collection the other night -- an
        admittedly biased batch of books!  I was surprised that of the
        "top layer" (my shelves are two to three levels deep) there
        was only one book with a mostly nude figure, MALE!, and it was
        the Finnish Kalivede, a myth cycle!  No sexism to decry!  I'm
        not sure if that's the result of a conscious aversion to the
        type of books that tend to have "fleshly" cover art or what!
    
        I *rely* on cover art to give me the first clue that I'll like
        the story -- I buy the story, not the art.  I seem to be drawn
        to wizards, dragons, unicorns, and fanstatic scenes that are
        obviously not familiar and earthlike.  I seem to avoid muscles
        and warriors and battle scenes.  So when cover art is not 
        appropriate and especially when it is also something I avoid,
        I may miss a good read!  Distressing on two counts!
    
        One final comment -- marketing practices are what they are --
        some are good, intelligent, laudable and some stink.  The BETTER
        genre publishers (any special genre) commission work for covers,
        the schlock houses use what's available.  In romantic fiction
        they have "bodice-rippers", sensationalistic cover art depicting,
        for all practical purposes, rape.  I deplore them, but they
        DO accurately represent the stories.  And readers who enjoy
        the stories like the art.  Same here.  Each to his own -- enjoy
        what you enjoy.  (But expect criticism from Someone whe what
        you appear to enjoy can be perceived to  denigrate someone!
        It's our moral imperative to slap you upside the head when that
        happens!!!!)
    
    The ever moral...
    
    Sherry!
   
      
  

    I never said that 90% of browsers are male.  I said 90% of *impulse
    buyers* are male.  This means that we men see something we like
    and pick it up.  What this means is women think more about a purchase
    before making it.

<    This means that we men see something we like and pick it up.


       Or attempt to, for evidence visit a singles bar. (just kidding,
       it was too good to pass up :*})

       It would be interesting to see the "buyer profile" of SF and F.
       I tend to like a bit of romance so read Fantasy alot but would
       like it best if spaceships were involved. I suspect there are
       more women reading fantasy but that we make a larger portion of
       the SF audience than we may have a few years ago. liesl

    	You want a romantic spaceship?
    
    	:^)
    

    Re .31 (Larry):
    
       >You want a romantic spaceship?
        
    "The Ship Who Sang" fills that bill. ;-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

<    	You want a romantic spaceship?
    
       oops,maybe I mean romance IN a spaceship (all that talk about
       freefall ya know ;*}) but I'll check out the "Ship that Sang" and see
       if romantic spaceships aren't my style too. :*) liesl

    Well, Jerry, all I can say is that I'm not French (at least, I don't
    think so...)  ;)
    
    Thanks for the tips on those artists.  I shall have to go find a
    Waldenbooks, leave my checkbook at home, and stare at covers to
    see if I find/like any of those people.   Which reminds me....
    
    I must admit, covers can sell me into looking at a book if I'm not
    looking for one by a specific author already.  However, I can pretty
    much tell a cover painted for the "quick sell" rather than the ones
    that seem to somewhat accurately depict what's going on inside the
    book, and I shy away from those skin ones, mainly because you've
    seen one, you've seen them all and the stories usually aren't worth
    reading the blurb on the back of the cover.
    
    (sorry for the run on grammer...been a long day....)
    
                                                         ---kim

       I was just looking on the book I'm currently reading (The Rose of
       the Prophet) and I don't see where they tell the name of the
       cover artist. Where is this usually listed? liesl

    Usually, the cover art will be listed on the copyright page.  It
    will be listed above the L)C listing and following the author's
    name.

    And not all publishers give the name of the cover artist.
    And even the ones that do don't do it all the time.
    
    --- jerry

Depending on  the artist, the cover painting may also be signed.  Don Maitz,
possibly  my  favorite  sf  artist,  always  has  his  name someplace in the
picture.  Some of the covers he's been responsible for are ARIOSTO (1st pb
edition) by Chelsea Quinn Yarboro, several of the Flat Earth series 1st pb
editions  by  Tannith  Lee  (Death's  Master,  etc.),  and several of the pb
editions of Richard Cowper's works.

						Rod Burr

Speaking of covers that don't relate to the contents of the book, how about the
covers of the Balantine (sp?) edition of the "Lord of the Rings"? As I recall
reading in Tolkein's biography, he detested the choice of artwork which has
absolutely no bearing on the story. Even the cover of the Harvard Lampoon's
spoof, "Bored of the Rings" is more relevant. 

Dave 

    
    Well, Tolkien may not have been particularly fond of the paintings
    he did that Ballantine chose, but they're about a million times
    better than the dreck currently on the 50th anniversary paperback
    editions.  Blech!
    
    DFW

    Re .39 & .40
    
    I think .39 does not refer to Tolkien's own paintings, which were used
    for a printing of LotR made after his death, but to a surrealistic
    blue-and-magenta cover that came out in the '60s.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    
    Anyone ever looked closely at the poster art done for the movie
    Star Wars? I laugh everytime I pick up my LaserDisc copy of it and
    see Carrie Fisher looking *GOOD*! And Mark Hamel doesn't look too
    bad either. 
    
    Ray

<    Well, Tolkien may not have been particularly fond of the paintings
<    he did that Ballantine chose, but they're about a million times
<    better than the dreck currently on the 50th anniversary paperback
<    editions.  Blech!
    
I was refering to the surrealistic paintings of emus (or whatever), strange 
lizards and "Japanese lanterns" growing on trees. I happen to think that 
Tolkien's drawings, although primative, go well with the story. 

I've got the 50th edition in hardcover. Please describe the paperback cover if
you would. Thanks. 

Dave

    
    It's been quite a while since I saw them, and for obvious reasons
    I don't dwell on them.
    
    I belive Fellowship of the ring featured a black-haired Galadriel.
    
    DFW

    Sorry to through things back a few months, especially since this has nothing
    to do with the base note, but I just read through this topic and I need to
    nit pick a bit.

.18

>    BUT (as a reader) it bothers me that on the exceptionally well-done
>    cover to "Skeen's Leap", the protagonist is shown to be an Annie
>    Lennox look-alike (white-blonde) when the story-line specifically
>    mentions her dark hair.  (Subsequent covers correct that.)  It bothers

Yes, there are many cases of inconsistencies between the covers and the contents
of books.  Unfortunately, you have chosen a bad example.  If you re-read 
'Skeen's Leap' you'll see that at some point she cuts her hair short and 
bleaches it in order to pass as a [I forget thier name but some other humanoid
that always have white-blond hair].  The subsequent books portray the 
bleach job as it grows out.  All very consistent.

I sat in on one of the art panels at Boskone a couple of years ago.  On the
subject of the cover reflecting the contents of the book, the artists complained
there is often little to work with.  They are not always given the book to
read before creating the cover.  Sometimes they are given only a brief summary.
The artists (and also the authors in the audience) seemed quite content with
laying any and all blame on the publishers.  Very rarely are the authors
consulted on the cover art.

    Re .45:
    
>I sat in on one of the art panels at Boskone a couple of years ago.  On the
>subject of the cover reflecting the contents of the book, the artists complained
>there is often little to work with.  They are not always given the book to
>read before creating the cover.  Sometimes they are given only a brief summary.
 
    This has nothing to do with Boris, but once upon a time there was
    a perfectly awful ("so awful it was funny") book by Stanley Mullin
    called _Kinsmen of the Dragon_.  It was published by Shasta, which
    frequently used Hannes Bok as an artist.  I read the book and saw
    the cover (which had a dragon, a Druid, a lokely girl, and associated
    characters and critters) had virtually nothing to do with the text.
    When Bok and I became friends a few years later, I asked him what
    relationship the cover had to the story.  "Beats me," he said. 
    "I never read the book.  They told me to do a cover with a Druid
    on it, and I gave them a picture with a Druid on it."
    
    I miss Hannes.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.   

    Following up myself, the 1990 Boris calendar is now out, and I have
    a copy.  The 1988 was on mythology, and the 1990 is on -- mythology.
    Methinks that Boris got off onto _such_ a mythology kick that he
    painted up enough for two calendars...
    
    An interesting point, of no particular significance, is that the
    face on his centerfold Athena looks nearly identical to a lady flight
    instructor I knew several years ago, but I stack that up to coincidence;
    for one, my acquaintence was nowhere that muscular.
    
    A side benefit of the latest work is that it includes some of the
    more obscure myths.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    
        For those of you interested in obtaining art by the dealers
    we've been discussing, please see note 495.3 in this conference.
    
    
    
                               L.J.