Comment to 'Presentation of cover.'
  • As when you posted this cover previously, Rob, I'm not convinced by either version of it. It doesn't say fantasy to me; indeed, the elements feel somehow contradictory, randomly juxtaposed. (That said, I am generally unimpressed by pretty much all covers.)

    Additionally, if I were to read a version of the blurb as you provided, I would also put it right back down. If there's supposed to be a strong Scottish connection, I would expect Celtic mythology rather than the almost-trite Greek.

    0 0 0 0 0 0
    • Waaa! I hope you're not a fantasy book buyer, Rick. That wasn't my blurb, just a rough I posted as I uploaded the covers.

      The Greek connection is not, 'trite'. It runs through the whole book and two chapters later on are spent on Olympus. The Scottish connection is strong early, until the plot reveals the connection. The MacDonalds swim in Norse genes. As for the connection between the Greek Gods and the MacDonald clan, the book explains it well.

      Anyway, thanks for your opinion.

      The score is now 1.5- v -1.5 = not sure (smiley face).

      0 0 0 0 0 0
      • Bad news, Rob. When it comes to novels, 95% of what I read is classsified as fantasy.

        As to the triteness of the Greek pantheon, it isn't a question of whether you have a good explanation for it. It's that they - and their Roman equivalents - are the first-line generic fallback for much of Western society when looking for a mythical storyline to weave into a narrative. (The second being Norse.) It's a consequence of history, the spillover from the amount of Europe conquered by the Romans.

        I'm not saying it's wrong. Only that, to make it memorable, you need to work harder, be more subtle in your connections and twists, than if you chose other pantheons that haven't been called upon so often to provide supernatural antagonism.

        0 0 0 0 0 0
        • Rick, once again, thank you for your comments, appreciated. I could not have worked any harder than I have over the last two months. My twists and connections are great (too me), unique (too me), and not like anything I've read related to Greek and Norse mythology (this is correct-to me). Totally new. That won't make it sell, but I loved writing it. 

          Re the Greeks and Romans, the reason they are so big in literature is because they (Greeks in particular) wrote the book on it, didn't they. The greatest stories ever written, and as strong today as ever. Protagonists the like of which we've not seen since. Achilles, Heracles, King Leonidis, Odysseus, and so on and so on. Imperfect to a man, failures galore, and yet, loyal to their gods, mostly.

          Yes, they are the first-line fallback, and for good reason - they never fade from memory. It's similar with the Scots. A romantic history loved by many readers, but still, protagonists with many faults. Rob McGregor, Wallace?, Robert Bruce (for Pete's sake), the bonnie Prince, and the Argyles. Heros for sure, but men with enormouse failings. As were the Greeks, and god don't we love them for it. Perhaps modern day writers could learn from the old writers and make their heros less perfect.

          Anyway, it is those who must sell the book who are most important at this stage. I'me done with it, but confident it's flaws won't worry the average lovers of a good yarn.





          0 0 0 0 0 0