Cover or story?

[weirdmonger]

I love all these covers. Always have done. Collected many over the years. But to what extent are the books, their covers, the actual 'things' themselves, more important than the text inside?

[mattofthespurs]

As collections get larger, especially for the anthologies, then I suspect it's the covers I'm collecting rather than their contents.

The stories within are repeated so many times that I find it quite exciting nowadays if I manage to pick up an anthology that has a story I have not read in it. This doesn't stop me from buying the book if the cover is something I have not seen before.

The Pan books of Horror stories are a fine example in that I have 3 versions of each of the first 6 (?) books because the covers are different.

[Dr Strange]

I reckon I'm in the minority around here, but for me it's only ever about the stories. I don't collect books - except in as much as I keep a book if it's got a story in it that I think I will want to read again. Otherwise I get rid. So, if I have a couple of anthologies that only have a couple of stories I like, and then I find a book that has them all in it, I keep that one and the others go to the charity shop.

Hang on til I get me tin hat and flak jacket...

So, that's why I don't have ANY Pan Horrors, Fontana Horrors, or Fontana Ghosts on my shelves any more. I've replaced them with other collections that have more of the stuff I like in them.

As for covers, sure it's great to have covers that appeal to my particular taste... but it's no big deal for me if they don't. I certainly wouldn't buy a book I already have just because it's got a "better" cover.

Please let me stay...

[franklinmarsh]

Fascinating! I'm very much interested in covers. When I was a youngster, newsagents used to have large paperback sections, and I could spend hours staring at the covers. I have an affection for certain covers, even though I've never owned, let alone read certain books. The A Clockwork Orange and Casino Royale galleries may have given some indication of that. Even I'd admit it seems pointless to own 10 or so copies of the same book, but it's a fascination. From the 1950s to the 1980s, the variation in covers (for the same book) is something that intrigues me, especially in, say, the work of Ian Fleming or Agatha Christie. The variation in the covers of, for instance, James Herbert's books from the 1970s to today degenerates from adolescent thrills to mind-numbing tedium - but that might be to do with me ageing.

I've just read two of Ken Bruen's tough police thrillers (thanks for the recommendation, Ben!) that were good books and great reads - both had dull, uninspired covers that interest me not in the slightest.
On the other hand, H P Saucecraft has posted a scan of a book, the cover of which has reawoken an interest that I haven't felt for a long time. I'm preparing a screed simply on this cover, but can't put it up 'til I've read the darned thing.

[vaughan]

It's all about the story for me. But I will seek the best cover I can.

And Dr. Strange, don't feel bad about the Pan thing - unlike many here I very rarely read short fiction - I prefer a novel. So you're not alone.

Cover art is amazing - but if I went with great covers as well as attractive stories then the whole thing would be out of control and I'd need to move to a much bigger place.

I keep the cream, and adore the rest from afar. But it's novels for me.

Take The Rats as an example. The first copy I had was a newer print, bit of a rubbish cover. I enjoyed reading it. But I came across the original cover which I prefer, so I bought that as well. I'm in the process of finding a new owner for my first copy. No need for me to have both.................

[Craig Herbertson]

Its quite remakable the spectrum of insanity between covers and contents. I tend to read more horror shorts - but prefer novels in fanatasy (about 20 fantasy books fulfil my draconian criteria for what constitutes fantasy and almost all of them are fifty years old). SF (sorry dem) is about evenly mixed bewteen novel and short.

I absolutely love the covers of early works and almost without hesitation hate anything after 1985. I would buy for example a corgi edition of Bradburys Dandelion wine if it was cheap enough even though I already have a copy and have read the book several times purely because I like the cover.

In a vault coming out ceremony for the terminally obssessed I admit that I have about eleven copis of one book some with even the same cover. There...I've said it.

[franklinmarsh]

Oct 2, 2009 9:05:51 GMT Craig Herbertson said:

In a vault coming out ceremony for the terminally obssessed I admit that I have about eleven copis of one book some with even the same cover. There...I've said it.

Now that's dedication! It does get a bit trainspotterish. I have two copies of the film tie in edition of Dr No - the diff being that one is Pan with an X number and one Great Pan with a G number.
Also two copies of the film tie in of The Man With The Golden Gun - outwardly the same but the earlier edition has film credits on the inside cover. I'll never be cured!

[franklinmarsh]

Oct 2, 2009 9:22:21 GMT franklinmarsh said:

Oct 2, 2009 9:05:51 GMT Craig Herbertson said:

In a vault coming out ceremony for the terminally obssessed I admit that I have about eleven copis of one book some with even the same cover. There...I've said it.

Now that's dedication! It does get a bit trainspotterish. I have two copies of the film tie in edition of Dr No - the diff being that one is Pan with an X number and one Great Pan with a G number.
Also two copies of the film tie in of The Man With The Golden Gun - outwardly the same but the earlier edition has film credits on the inside cover. I'll never be cured!

And two copies of Skinhead by Richard Allen. One is ripped to shreds and falling apart, but it's a second edition with the miscredit 'Skinhead by James Allen' inside.

[andydecker]

There...I've said it.

Be assured, you are not the only one.

I used to be a content buyer only. But in the last years - and thanks to the vault - I have been buying some books in more than one edition. The last insanity was Raymond Giles "Night of the Vampire". I had the german edition. then I saw the beautiful NEL edition here posted. I ordered it online and was very disappointed when I got the american edition instead. I don´t know what devil possed me, I ordered it again and got the NEL. Madness.

And I don´t want to know how many different editions of Howard and Lovecraft I have. A lot. In both languages. But the Lovecraft I bought not for cover reasons than for readability. I thought the old Panther edition hard to read with its tiny print. I have the Voyager one which binding is a bit dubious. Now I have the new Hardcover which is terrific in every aspect.

But Howard I also bought for covers, I have to confess. I have the Berkley Edition done by Karl Edward Wagner which is still one of the best, both editorially and coverwise, I have the new Del Reys and the new Gollancz Conan. But every time I see it I am still tempted to buy the old british Futura (?) edition with Frazetta.

Problem is - and here the Vault is so great - there are often so many different covers for the same book. For instance I have G.N.Smith´s "Night of the Crabs" in a very late edition. But after seeing the earlier edition - the one with the girl - I am tempted to buy it again.

I guess Kim Newman wasn´t so far off when he wrote "The Man Who Collected Barker" ;D

[weirdmonger]

I can empathise with all that. Fascinating accounts.

My yardstick or benchmark has always derived from nostalgic or sentimental value, i.e. stemming from the time I first read a book or, for example, read it aloud at the 'Horror Orgies' with PFJ in the Sixties etc etc.

However, now I'm 61, I'm divesting myself of all nostalgia and sentimentality. There I've said it!

[franklinmarsh]

Hee! It's so difficult.

I recently picked up a book that had Clive Barker's Books Of Blood 1 - 3 collected within, because I want to reread Rawhead Rex. I'd found Vol 1.
I keep thinking back to when I had all six. Vols 2 and 4 - 6 in glorious light green with photographs of distorted faces on the cover. 1 and 3 with *&%$ing rubbish drawings. Ah well.

[mattofthespurs]

Oct 2, 2009 10:30:56 GMT franklinmarsh said:

Hee! It's so difficult.

I recently picked up a book that had Clive Barker's Books Of Blood 1 - 3 collected within, because I want to reread Rawhead Rex. I'd found Vol 1.
I keep thinking back to when I had all six. Vols 2 and 4 - 6 in glorious light green with photographs of distorted faces on the cover. 1 and 3 with *&%$ing rubbish drawings. Ah well.

Humpf. I prefer Barker's 'rubbishy' drawings. I had all 6 in the green covers but got rid of them and replaced them with the drawn covers.

[franklinmarsh]

You maniac!

[Craig Herbertson]

Sentimentality is a big issue, yes. I can't walk past early foursquare Burroughs book without blinkers

[dem bones]

Oct 2, 2009 9:47:00 GMT andydecker said:

I have been buying some books in more than one edition. The last insanity was Raymond Giles "Night of the Vampire". I had the german edition. then I saw the beautiful NEL edition here posted. I ordered it online and was very disappointed when I got the american edition instead. I don´t know what devil possed me, I ordered it again and got the NEL. Madness.

it's murder if you develop a Dennis Wheatley fixation; so many editions, which to choose? Do you go with the 70's flame babe variations, the fancy dress offerings of the 80's or the '50's and '60's editions for the often brilliant paintings of Frank C. Pape and 'Sax'? in the end, the only solution is try for all of them. Of course, explaining away one copy of Gateway To Hell or his science fiction masterpiece Star Of Ill Omen is difficult enough ....