| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Trace_Coburn |
Posted - 30 Mar 2006 : 14:05:41
I had occasion to get into the city and its FLGS today. (Picked up PH3.5, a second-hand Silver Marches, two Dragon back-issues and a couple of FR novels. Yay me!  )
However, one of the novels I thought of buying, but eventually didn't, was a 'new' copy of Spellfire with a black cover. I still have the 'old' version (with the cover-art of Shandril smiting down a dracolich in its lair while Elminster and Florin look on), and even though the binding is starting to get a little dodgy in a couple of places, I'm not quite ready to replace it just yet; before I make a decision either way, I'd like the following question answered.
My question is this: I remember reading some commentary (here?) from Ed o' the Greenwood about how 'chopped up' Spellfire was during editing, and how he had to do 'some' re-writes. Does the text within this 'new' version of Spellfire differ significantly from the 'old' version? Have those jagged slashes of the editor's knife through the text indeed been papered over (giving us a tale closer to the author's original manuscript/intent), or is it just a new wrapper around the exact same content as the original publication? |
| 1 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Kuje |
Posted - 30 Mar 2006 : 17:40:43
It's changed some but for every word Ed included in the "new" version, a word from the "old" version had to be removed. So it's a little closer to the original, but it's not.
Ed's and THO's comments about it are in my sig. Search for spellfire in the indexes. |
|
|
