And now: the wait for the cover art. I'm quite curious how they'll be designing this one.
Announcing STAR TREK: DTI and other CLB news
- Thread starter Christopher
- Start date
And now: the wait for the cover art. I'm quite curious how they'll be designing this one.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
Well, there's a new cover just appeared on the S&S catalogue page - along with the art for Indistinguishable from Magic that Lonemagpie showed us a while back - and it looks quite interesting (although it retains the "NOT FINAL" warning below it)...
http://catalog.simonandschuster.com...ob=0&pn=&ed=&showcart=&camefrom=&find=trek&a=
I've seen the design sketch for the cover, and unless there have been some radical changes in the past eight weeks, what you're seeing at that link is just one element of the final image.
Now: can anyone identify what specific clock that is?
Now: can anyone identify what specific clock that is?
It's the Shepherd Clock, right?
Yep. The Shepherd Gate Clock at the Royal Greenwich Observatory.
Besides the Greenwich connection, 'twas the little baby clock on its face that gave it away. 
And here I thought the giveaways would be the words "Shepherd" and "London" inscribed on its face...
That's me; always taking the roundabout way to come to a conclusion...
The cover is meh. Reminds me of the Engines of Destiny cover. That blurb, though...
Well, it's sucktastic. I see what the copywriter was going for -- a wry, ironic tone -- but it comes across as infantile and unfunny. Also, what does "unsung anchors" even mean?
Well, it's sucktastic. I see what the copywriter was going for -- a wry, ironic tone -- but it comes across as infantile and unfunny. Also, what does "unsung anchors" even mean?
As I've said, the cover image shown there is merely one image element of the actual cover, unless they've radically stripped it down from the sketch I was shown.
The blurb is a severely and awkwardly truncated version of the sell-sheet text I wrote for Jaime Costas on her request. I assume it's just the rough placeholder version for the catalog; I don't know whether the actual cover blurb will be the full text I wrote or something new written by the editor. I actually wrote the blurb before the novel outline, so it's kind of vague on the specifics, but it still fits the idea behind the story pretty well. And yes, "unsung anchors in a chaotic universe" was my turn of phrase. The use of "unsung" -- unacknowledged, unappreciated -- has thematic significance.
The blurb is a severely and awkwardly truncated version of the sell-sheet text I wrote for Jaime Costas on her request. I assume it's just the rough placeholder version for the catalog; I don't know whether the actual cover blurb will be the full text I wrote or something new written by the editor. I actually wrote the blurb before the novel outline, so it's kind of vague on the specifics, but it still fits the idea behind the story pretty well. And yes, "unsung anchors in a chaotic universe" was my turn of phrase. The use of "unsung" -- unacknowledged, unappreciated -- has thematic significance.
Writing marketing copy is a definite skill. It's not like other writing.
And, Christopher, did you mean to write that Jaime isn't with Pocket any longer? That's how your second paragraph reads. The construction "the editor" at the end of the second sentence draws attention to itself; you've used that construction before in this thread in places where the use of a name is more natural. So, the clear implication of the second paragraph is that Jaime commissioned the marketing text, and now a different editor has rewritten it. Which leads to the conclusion that Jaime is no longer the editor of Star Trek fiction (or, perhaps, even with Pocket).
It's not like other writing.And, Christopher, did you mean to write that Jaime isn't with Pocket any longer? That's how your second paragraph reads. The construction "the editor" at the end of the second sentence draws attention to itself; you've used that construction before in this thread in places where the use of a name is more natural. So, the clear implication of the second paragraph is that Jaime commissioned the marketing text, and now a different editor has rewritten it. Which leads to the conclusion that Jaime is no longer the editor of Star Trek fiction (or, perhaps, even with Pocket).
Yes, Csalem, she went out on maternity leave in March, as I understand it. I very much doubt she would still be on maternity leave eight months later, though; max leave under FMLA is six months, I believe.
No, I'm just pointing out the indication in Christopher's phraseology here and here that Jaime is no longer the editor on his book. Which suggests, since her maternity leave would be over, that she's either moved on to something else in the organization or she's no longer with Pocket.
No, I'm just pointing out the indication in Christopher's phraseology here and here that Jaime is no longer the editor on his book. Which suggests, since her maternity leave would be over, that she's either moved on to something else in the organization or she's no longer with Pocket.
Just to be clear, that's your inference, not my indication. And that's all I have to say on the subject.
This isn't a court of law, Christopher. No need to take the fifth.
If Jaime's not your editor, there's no harm in denying it. And if I misread you, you can come right out and say it; you've had no problems with that before. But a passive-agressive non-denial pretty much seals the deal that I was right.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
^Well, you're obviously going to read a ton of stuff into anything I say from here on, so all I can say is...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzYpADZiv00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzYpADZiv00
I'm not reading anything into what you wrote, other than what you wrote.
Christopher, if I drew a mistaken inference, just say that. Just say, "Allyn, Jaime is still my editor, and your reading comprehension skills are crap."
But I don't think you will, because I know you, and I know you don't like to lie or perpetrate knowing falsehoods. That's why your passive-aggressive non-denial is the confirmation to me that I drew the right conclusion from your use of "my editor" and "the editor," that Jaime is no longer editing DTI and, very possibly, Star Trek fiction. But I also know that you're not going to give me the satisfaction of saying that I was right.
Look, I don't bring this up to pick on you or attack you. I really and truly don't. I don't care one way or the other whether Jaime has a role at Pocket today. Rather, if she isn't overseeing Pocket's Star Trek line any longer, I think that's an important thing to discuss, and that's something fandom as a whole wants (and probably needs) to know, because it has serious implications for the future of Star Trek literature. A line in turmoil like Pocket's Star Trek line is -- cutbacks in the publishing line, fired editors, canceled books -- may not have a future. And I think that would be a very sad thing, indeed, if Star Trek fiction passed from this Earth.
Christopher, if I drew a mistaken inference, just say that. Just say, "Allyn, Jaime is still my editor, and your reading comprehension skills are crap."
But I don't think you will, because I know you, and I know you don't like to lie or perpetrate knowing falsehoods. That's why your passive-aggressive non-denial is the confirmation to me that I drew the right conclusion from your use of "my editor" and "the editor," that Jaime is no longer editing DTI and, very possibly, Star Trek fiction. But I also know that you're not going to give me the satisfaction of saying that I was right.
Look, I don't bring this up to pick on you or attack you. I really and truly don't. I don't care one way or the other whether Jaime has a role at Pocket today. Rather, if she isn't overseeing Pocket's Star Trek line any longer, I think that's an important thing to discuss, and that's something fandom as a whole wants (and probably needs) to know, because it has serious implications for the future of Star Trek literature. A line in turmoil like Pocket's Star Trek line is -- cutbacks in the publishing line, fired editors, canceled books -- may not have a future. And I think that would be a very sad thing, indeed, if Star Trek fiction passed from this Earth.
