/lit/ - Literature

wordy covers with dumb fonts are the absolute worst

>>17049972
I'm a brainlet, what is this "style" called? And is it different from the Paradise Lost/Divine Comedy art style?

>>17049972
Too wordy and that font is stupid.

Signet chads get in here

>>17049979
>I'm a brainlet, what is this "style" called?

THE CHRONICLE WAS WRITTEN IN THE LATE SIXTEENTH CENTURY, DURING THE MANNERIST EPOCH, BUT IT WAS FIRSTLY PRINTED TOWARD THE END OF THE FIRST THIRD OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY, DURING THE BAROQUE EPOCH.

THE COVER SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN MADE SOMETIME FROM THE SECOND HALF OF THE LAST DECADE OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE SECOND HALF OF THE FIRST DECADE OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY, SINCE IT IS MANNERISTIC, BUT SLIGHTLY BAROQUE.


>And is it different from the Paradise Lost/Divine Comedy art style?

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT YOU MEAN BY THIS.

>>17050022
You're not bad for a tipfag, CŒMGENVS

>>17050022
I don't really know anything about art, but I was wondering what to call the style of your image versus pic related

>>17050011

>>17050059


THE COVER REFERRED IN THE IMAGE THAT I POSTED, AND THE ONE REFERRED IN THE ONE THAT YOU POSTED, WERE BOTH MADE WITH THE SAME TECHNIQUE: ENGRAVING, BUT THE ARTISTICAL STYLES ARE DIFFERENT: MINE IS LATE MANNERISTIC/EARLY BAROQUISTIC; YOURS, ROMANTICISTIC.

>>17050045
For me? It's the original cover of GR or bust

>>17050087
Excellent. Thank you for your help.

>>17049936
this cover is the ultimate pleb filter

I'm a big fan of this one

>>17052626
>>17052634
>>17052660
Don't care for these d e s u, unfortunately I own the last one. It ain't bad but it ain't great

>>17052674
the werther one was a joke, it is the worst cover I know of and I laugh every time I see it desu

I’d call this one a winner if I knew what the heck was going on. My guess is the story inevitably repeated itself on some distant space colony—in other words, nukes started dropping again and the Church (which has a mothership now) be like “aight imma head out”

>>17052716
What do you mean you don't know what's going on? The cover is an illustration from the third part of the book

>>17052716
Or it’s a mystical representation of the Church dropping nukes and destroying everybody, while staying safe itself, because by holding and preserving the knowledge of humanity it becomes somewhat responsible for bringing about its own destruction, but nevertheless does not destroy itself by maintaining aloof. The question as to whether the Church or technological advancement is a good or bad thing in Miller’s novels is somewhat of a complicated question (as it is in reality)

>>17052741
It’s described as a rocketship, and the scene looks altogether too advanced with the hoverplatorms/lectionary

>>17052761
Oh I see your point. Artistic license I guess

Adelphi GANG rise up

>>17052808

>>17052842

AoM for me.

>>17049936

>>17052883
Saw the right cover posted here and I stop every time I see it, it's really cool, but I probably will never read the book because I don't read fantasy.

>>17053505
Lmao I thought it was gonna be so good cuz of that cover WHY WHY WHY