Without context it just seems like a random thing to have done. New cover too, and missing the number. Anyone know why?
Why did Pocket reprint Nightshade in 2010?
- Thread starter chrinFinity
- Start date
I'm just guessing here, but I think it was because the author (Laurel K. Hamilton) had become wildly popular for her series of (non-Trek) vampire stores, and Pocket thought they might get some of her non-Trek fanbase to but a Trek novel with her name on the cover.
^Exactly. Part of it was that the four Abramsverse novels had been cancelled and they needed something to fill the gap in the schedule with, but part of it was that Hamilton has become hugely, hugely popular since she wrote Nightshade and they wanted to draw in her fans.
^I'm surprised we haven't seen a reprint of Corona, seeing as how Greg Bear has become pretty huge as an SF author since then. Although I guess that's not the same as being huge on the scale of a Hamilton or Meyer.
Speaking of Greg Bear, our state public access channel just aired an interview with him this past week.
You can watch it here: http://tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwplayer&eventID=2013060044
Thanks for the info. I've never heard of her aside from Nightshade, and I'm not interested in vampire fiction. However, my confusion is cleared.
Wasn't "Corona" reprinted back around 2000 when Pocket was reissuing the John Ford novels under the duology title, and with a slightly modified cover?
Just out of curiosity... did it work? I know S&S doesn't disclose sales figures, but does anyone have any idea if this paid off as they hoped?
Yep.
(Damn 'splodey universe...
)
I have no way of knowing.
I think it was Spider Robinson who once said; "Whenever you ask a question that starts with 'why', nine times out of ten the answer is 'money'".
In addition to the reasons stated above they probably figured that it would sell almost as well as, if indeed not as well as, any new release in the line without all the costs of a new work.
By the way, when I use that Robinson quote, I usually add my own corrolary which is that the remaining instances are split between inertia and sheer stupidity.
In addition to the reasons stated above they probably figured that it would sell almost as well as, if indeed not as well as, any new release in the line without all the costs of a new work.
By the way, when I use that Robinson quote, I usually add my own corrolary which is that the remaining instances are split between inertia and sheer stupidity.
I do have to wonder what Hamilton's fans thought of Nightshade, seeing as it is wholly lacking in the supernatural pr0n that is the latter half of the Anita Blake series.
Clearly, somebody needs to pay Hamilton enough to write the definitive Trek slash novel!
(Strange but true: I actually wrote the back cover copy for the first couple of "Anita Blake" novels, back when they were mass-market originals for Ace. It's a small world . . . .)
(Strange but true: I actually wrote the back cover copy for the first couple of "Anita Blake" novels, back when they were mass-market originals for Ace. It's a small world . . . .)
Last edited:
Khan Harrison
Ensign
with the new movie out and Abrams going to Star Wars, any chance those novels will see the light of day?
First off, Abrams and Bad Robot will still be producing the next movie, even though someone else will probably direct it. So there's no reason that Abrams's upcoming directorial assignments would have any effect on the status of the novels.
Anyway, the events of Into Darkness pretty soldily contradict a lot of what I did in my novel, at least -- or cover some of the same ground, making mine a bit redundant. The book would no longer work as part of the film continuity. I gather that's true of at least one of the others as well.
Similar threads
- Poll
