Rizzoli Responds To Accusations Of Shoddiness On Corto Maltese

You can read the publisher's response to accusations of shoddiness on a new Corto Maltese book here; they sent a letter out that's gone around a bunch (I had it forwarded to me three times). The criticisms they're trying to deflect are best articulated here. The upshot of the explanation seems to be that the edition is based on a mid-1990s book that creator Hugo Pratt approved. That's a good thing to point out, I guess. That such changes would have been made against the creator's wishes otherwise would make this a bit more awful. As it is, the story is just as interesting in terms of what the market for archival reprints will accept and what it won't -- there's going to be significant pushback against lousy production, cropping and resizing in an era where other publishers are falling all over themselves to make the best-looking books they can, not just an acceptable version.

Some readers will no doubt try and place into a nerd court framework, where "we can't dictate to the creator and the estate what's acceptable" or whatever. That's sort of beside the point because no one's really doing that. Barring brutal malfeasance, no one's suggesting that the publisher be censured or punched in the ghoulies for making what some feel is a lousy-looking book. Certain fans are just not going to want that book, particularly when they hear about the choices made. While I think this one is going to be a slam dunk "yuck" from a lot of readers, there are editions and projects out there with finer distinctions to be debated, and I think a discussion of those kinds of issues will be a part of such projects' public acceptance through the remainder of this generation of such projects.
 
posted 6:00 am PST | Permalink
 

---

 
Daily Blog Archives
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
 
Full Archives