Lyra's Press next title will be "The Alchemist" by Paolo Coelho, illustrated by Gary Gianni

Since I haven't seen it mentioned yet, Rich announced this, along with a couple of Classic titles in the queue, namely The Lost World and The Wizard of Oz in his Minds of The Press interview:

That said, he also mentions Press titles could be 18+ months apart, so we have some waiting to do! Lots of other great insights in there that are well worth reading:

https://www.collectiblebookvault.com/post/minds-of-the-press-vol-5

EDIT: I managed to misspell the authors name, Paulo Coelho.

The Alchemist was nicely done by the Folio Society quite recently. I did not find it to be a great read and I strongly suggest anyone contemplating this obtain a cheap paperback edition, read it, then determine whether you want this in an expensive private press edition.

>2 dlphcoracl: It was one of my favorite high-school reads, and I'm still quite fond of it, but I agree that Coelho's style can be a bit polarizing.

That Folio Society edition is one their nicest standard publications that I've seen in recent years, but while I personally like the illustrations in that version, I'm excited to see what Gary Gianni does with the work.

>1 NathanOv: Interesting, should be worth a look. Gary Gianni illustrated the recent adaptation of The Call of Cthulhu for Flesk, I like his style.

>3 NathanOv:

I love the work Rich (Lyra's Books) does but someone needs to help him out with literature selection. These are less than inspiring titles, certainly nothing I find compelling when compared to the recent and forthcoming editions from the likes of the Foolscap Press, Nawakum Press, Barbarian Press, etc.

>3 NathanOv: Same here. The Alchemist is one of my favourite books and I am really happy with the choice.

And I am looking forward to seeing Gregory Machess darker take on Wizard of Oz as well

>5 dlphcoracl: From the queue lining up to purchase his books, it appears that lack of appeal isn’t something he needs help with. Why would your taste be so definitive as to what’s worthwhile?

I have multiple books from those presses you mention, but also happy to see his take on what he considers is worth publishing.

>7 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: The Lyra's Classic titles continue to be hard sells for me, but Rich's fantastic artist selections keep convincing me, and likely will with Wizard of Oz too.

I'm personally quite happy with the Lyra's Press title selections so far, though.

>9 NathanOv: The Wizard of Oz doesn't hold much intrinsic interest for me, but I can be swayed by a good creative take on the edition (as I was with Conversation Tree's Peter Pan, another title I am otherwise lukewarm on). So how they realise their edition will be the deciding factor for me.

>8 What_What:

As usual, you have twisted my comments. To answer your skewed question:

I stated that the Alchemist will not be to everyone's taste, and indeed it is not. Suggesting that someone attempt a read in an inexpensive edition before committing $600-$800 is not a matter of my personal taste, it is a matter of common sense.

Personally I can't wait for the Alchemist since it's one of my favorites. The classics definitely wouldn't have been my top choices but they seem interesting enough.

>5 dlphcoracl: I'm not a fan of the Alchemist. I do have numbered rights from Coraline. It will be a tough choice when it is released, as it will be hard to get future titles from Lyra's Press without rights.

The upcoming titles - Wizard of Oz, The Alchemist, and The Lost World - are disappointing to me in the sense that they aren't (IMO) very good in terms in literary merit.

Re: The Wizard of Oz, I wonder how many readers remember that it is about central banking?

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, perhaps America's favorite children's story, is also an informed comment on the battle over free silver in the 1890s. The characters in the story represent real figures such as William Jennings Bryan. This paper interprets the allegory for economists and economic historians, illuminating a number of elements left unexplained by critics concerned with the politics of the allegory. It also reexamines Bryan and the case for free silver. ...

Rockoff, H. (1990). The Wizard of Oz as a monetary allegory. Journal of Political Economy, 98(4), 739.

Also an early example of dystopian literature (recall the green glasses).

I hope they make a creative choice about who to get to write an introduction, afterword, or whatever. Lots of potential with this one, especially if they've already decided to go a darker route.

I don’t have any interest in the Alchemist, but may buy it and sell it on to keep my rights. I am far more interested in the Lost World, and, depending on the art/overall design, Oz.

>11 dlphcoracl: Apologies for skewing your comments. What does Rich need help with specifically? Note the comment I replied to didn’t have anything concerning buying a reading copy of any book.

>16 What_What:

I may be wrong, but I think Rich is still feeling his way as a fledgling publisher and he is limiting his choices based upon what he believes he can comfortably sell, especially in his Classics book line. As an example, I found ALL of the ten finalist choices in the Consensus Press thread far more interesting than The Lost World and The Wizard of Oz. Stated differently, it seems as if Rich Tong is underestimating his reading and collecting audience - they are more adventurous and open-minded that he is giving them credit for.

The Alchemist is another matter, not to my taste (not that it matters) but it clearly has a devoted following and it will easily sell. However, the comparable Folio Society choice of The Neverending Story for their 75th anniversary edition has much broader appeal.

Can't please everyone, but I wish Rich would spread his wings and reach for the stars a bit.

I am under the impression that he is choosing books on the basis of what books he personally (and the artists he works with) is excited about doing.

>18 ambyrglow:

You are correct -the artist factor certainly has come into play, i.e., Rich is selecting works of literature that his choice of artist(s) are excited about illustrating. However, this is somewhat akin to the tail wagging the dog.

>17 dlphcoracl: Thank you, that’s much better articulated than Rich needs help to make books more similar to other fine presses’.

I’m not sure I agree with it - it’s not a coincidence that the folks on librarything suggest books that the folks on librarything would like.

A large portion of his customer base isn’t on here.

>17 dlphcoracl: I think that you're wishing Lyra's would turn from a bookmaking venture to a publishing venture. As far as I understand it, their goal is to create beautiful limited editions, not to publish new literature or to push the envelope on old literature. To accomplish that goal, it's not only good but perhaps necessarily to pick titles with as broad an appeal as possible. They may not appeal to me or you, but clearly there is a huge portion of book collectors who are drawn to these genres.

>21 grifgon:

While these titles do not appeal to either of us, I don't see how The Alchemist, The Lost World and The Wizard of Oz have "as broad appeal as possible". Perhaps, I am clearly out of the current 21st century literary loop. Stranger things have happened.

Ugh, I really wish he hadn't chosen Alchemist. It's one of the few books I actively dislike -- basically Coelho has created the opposite of literature with that one. Who could forget such memorable quotes as "The Soul of the World spoke to the Heart of the Boy as he prayed to the God of the Desert who commanded the Spirit of the Wind". Ok I'll stop now...

Other titles are ok-ish but not super inspiring either, I'm happy I passed on Coraline.

>14 abysswalker: I hope they make a creative choice about who to get to write an introduction, afterword, or whatever

I hope they get Jerome Powell to write the intro.

>23 filox: "Who could forget such memorable quotes as "The Soul of the World spoke to the Heart of the Boy as he prayed to the God of the Desert who commanded the Spirit of the Wind".

I'd just like to point out for anyone not familiar with the work (and I still recommend reading at least a sample if you're on the fence) that the repeated structure in that sentence is kind of the point, and meant to stand out. Maybe not for everyone, but not terribly indicative of Coelho's prose in general.

>19 dlphcoracl: I don’t know whether it is a question of the tail wagging the dog, illustrated books should be a melding of art and story, when they work together it can be a unique looking book. Most books, nowadays, are a publisher hiring an artist who are doing work for hire (often fabulous art) but is a job. When you get an artist who has a voice and passion for a particular book, in my experience, you jump on it - as they produce over and above in order to express their voice, and want to make an extraordinary book and will do whatever is necessary to see it created. As an illustrated book. Gary Gianni’s work on Death and Honey and Christmas Carol are a really solid combination of a voice and story. Books that Rich likes are his taste and he’d like to see made into his books. He hopes people would want to see them as well, as do I.

>22 dlphcoracl: I don't see how The Alchemist, The Lost World and The Wizard of Oz have "as broad appeal as possible".

Anyone in the English-speaking world and millions (perhaps billions) of other people also know of The Wizard of Oz. So yes, that title certainly has universal appeal and it does not matter if someone has read the book or not, it has universal appeal regardless. As for The Alchemist (which I have not yet read) and The Lost World, I agree those are not as universally recognized, but fairly well-known titles themselves. What is NOT well-known is many of the books people like to collect and discuss on this forum! For instance, go visit Barbarian Press. They do amazing work and I have the utmost respect for them. However, no way Lyra would be able to sell hundreds of copies of -- Endgrain I or Endgrain II, or Endgrain III, or Poems by (insert author you've never heard of)... etc. Rich clearly has a vision in mind, and his vision seems to be to produce classic and well as "contemporary classics" in the most beautiful editions ever produced, and I am 100% in favor!

>25 marceloanciano: Don’t worry, going from what >18 ambyrglow: said to >19 dlphcoracl: is quite the leap, and most people wouldn’t draw that conclusion.

It’s clear to any reasonable person Rich makes the books that Rich wants to make. Finding a happy pairing with an illustrator who is just as passionate is icing on the cake. The fact that he can’t make enough to satisfy demand is also indicative of him not needing help to churn out another obscure to the masses finely made book of poetry with wood engravings, of which I own many.

I just want to reiterate what Marcelo said: finding an artist who’s always hoped to illustrate a particular book is a gift indeed. We’re lucky to have had a handful of those already.

In one case the book we’re working on isn’t even the one we initially approached them about. They turned the initial proposal down but told us about a book they had wanted to work on for over fifteen years and showed us sketches dating back. It’s hard to turn a project like that down when you know the work will truly be special.

>26 astropi: Well said.

>25 marceloanciano: I do think the work Lyra's and Arete puts in together with the artists come across beautifully, and love the support you lend the artist to showcase their vision. Dorian wasn't even on my radar (and isn't one I was particularly interested in collecting) until I saw the illustrations. There will always be people complaining about titles chosen. Passion projects should always win at the end of the day.

In my limited time as a collector, I've really come to appreciate what a difference it makes when the illustrator is passionate about the project. There's a publisher in operation now who I won't name that includes about 6 illustrations in all of their books, and they are technically fine, nothing really wrong with them, but there seems to be a lack of soul with them. It feels to me like it was just a job. And I then compare that to something like Death and Honey, where Gianni's illustrations, not just the quality but also the profuseness, display his passion for the project, and it's immensely satisfying to me. If only it could always be this way! Maybe I wouldn't consider reading Oz or Alchemist on a Kindle, but I suspect I will find Lyra's treatments irresistible given the artists' apparent strong commitment to them.

Huh, count me in the group as an incredibly strange choice. When I read the title of the thread I thought "there's no possible way." Out of centuries of literature to choose from... The Alchemist was the selection? Obviously it will sell incredibly well since it's popular fiction, but out of all the incredibly talented South American authors... this? Borges, Cortazar, Marquez, Bolano, Guimaraes Rosa, Llosa, Fuentes, Rulfo, and a title by Coelho was selected?!? I'm a little baffled to be honest. I know my post will be criticized, and the book isn't awful, but jeez.

>26 astropi: "What is NOT well-known is many of the books people like to collect and discuss on this forum! "

Hits the nail on the head.

>32 Joshbooks1: Rich noted from the get-go that he wants his "classic" line to focus on important influential works, such as Dorian Gray and Wizard of Oz. The second focus is on LIVING authors. Stardust, Coraline, Alchemist, all fit into this category. In your list of authors, only Mario Vargas Llosa is still living. Don't get me wrong, I too would love to see a beautiful edition by authors as you mentioned. BUT again, they are not alive so it would have to be part of the Lyra's Classic Collection. Secondly, you have to get rights to such works, and it can be a nightmare to the point where the project just will not happen. Anyway, hopefully that helps explain why Coelho was selected :)

Ugh, 'The Alchemist'. At least it's not, 'Eat, Pray, Love'. Still a hard pass for me. You can't win 'em all, I suppose.

>13 punkzip:
It’ll probably be easy to sell on unless the world economy is in freefall, and I say that as yet another poster who loathes the book, in my case for its single-layer-of-atoms-depth-philosophy dressed up as wisdom… but hey, that’s just my opinion, man! I’m sure it’ll be gorgeous.

>36 GusLogan:

Hammer - meet nail.

Perfectly summarized.

>32 Joshbooks1: I hear you. I keep hoping for one of these presses to pick up Silvina Ocampo or Adolfo Bioy Casares.

>34 astropi: This still doesn't make sense. Both previous authors are long dead, there are many more talented living South American authors than Coelho, and again, out of all the current living authors to choose from somehow this mediocre book gets selected? I don't even particularly like Dickens but Coelho doesn't deserve to be in the same category as him for a 'classic line.' This book is something you read on the airplane when a screaming child is next to you. I'm sorry but what a disappointment.

>38 Shadekeep: I forgot about Ocampo! I haven't read anything but Casares but will look into some titles this week.

>39 Joshbooks1: The dead authors were part of Lyra's Classics. The Alchemist is the next Lyra's Press after Coraline.

>40 Joshbooks1: For Casares you wouldn't go wrong with The Invention of Morel or Asleep in the Sun. There are short story collections as well if that's more what you're after. And he co-wrote a novel with Ocampo, Where There's Love, There's Hate.

Gosh it is entertaining to see the amount of emotions that come across over the title of the book, and how some people manage to sound so superior because they have 'better taste' than the masses. If you don't like the title, take a deep breath and move on. There are plenty of fine presses and titles to choose from. Not everyone in the world has the same liking and I honestly don't understand the need to be so critical and toxic towards an author/press/choice because it is not in line with your likes.

>39 Joshbooks1: What is your preoccupation with South American authors? Did Rich indicate he had some kind of quota to fill?

>43 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: Well said. This forum, like many other dedicated forums, are echo chambers, with strong superiority complexes. There are many reasonable members here who are self aware enough to appreciate varying tastes among people who enjoy the company of books. And then there’s the rest, like >5 dlphcoracl:.

>1 NathanOv: Thank you for posting the interview. It was an enjoyable read and of more value than just the next book announcement.

Regarding the upcoming titles, I think I agree with many here that if an artist is driving the choice in titles, all the better. For myself none of these are dream titles, but if given the opportunity and if funds avail, I will probably buy them. Why? Because Rich is an artist himself, the illustrators are passionate about the project, and the other books I’ve purchased from him are just so beautiful. While I always wish that my dream titles can be given my dream treatment, sometimes just one of the two is enough to blow me away.

>43 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: I agree with you. As soon as I saw The Alchemist announced yesterday I knew the condescending comments would soon arrive in droves. And sure enough... I've noticed time and time again that every time this book is mentioned it invariably attracts a certain set to come out preaching as to how much they dislike it and its 'pseudo-philosophy'. There's a study in there somewhere.

Also, we seem to have a similar debate every time Lyra's announce a new book. It was the same with Coraline (boring, more Gaiman) and A Christmas Carol (boring, too popular, been done before). I hope Rich just carries on doing what he wants and doesn't get influenced by such debates. Sales of both of those titles would seen to indicate that his instincts are correct. It's always been clear that Lyra's are aiming toward more 'popular' titles and I'm not sure why some here can't get their heads around that.

I've not read The Alchemist, but it's been on my extended "get to eventually" list for a while. The artistry of the book is what will make this edition a buy or a pass for me. I do like Gianni's work, so that's a step towards the affirmative.

>43 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: I guess I’ve missed the wider dialogue around the book, because I’m surprised to see people responding so vehemently to something that just isn’t for them.

>36 GusLogan: When some of the core themes of the book are simplicity and not overthinking or grasping at things that aren’t there, I’m not sure what more “depth” or deeper philosophical analysis you were looking for.

It’s a simple fable based on a classic folktale, and for me a nice cathartic read.

The Alchemist and Wizard of Oz don’t appeal to me, however I do like Conan Doyle’s The Lost World and think this is a good pick.

>48 NathanOv:

It had some very ardent fans when it came out, and I guess they - but mostly the book - rubbed some of us the wrong way. The list of books that have provoked me thus is extremely short! I do see the value in the old adage about saying nothing if you have nothing nice to say, apologies to those annoyed by my post.

It’s a simple fable simply put but the philosophy - well, the idea (as I remember it) that if you follow your heart/dreams everything will work out for the best and indeed better than it otherwise would have is… not falsifiable, I guess. But easy to latch on to if you want to do what you feel like. I’m probably misrepresenting it!

>50 GusLogan: Oh I don’t know that “if don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all” applies to a book discussion thread. I’m just used to more “meh, not for me” responses so was a bit surprised.

That’s interesting though - Santiago goes chasing his dream in the book and doesn’t succeed. In fact, it goes quite badly, and he realizes at the end that he’d been living somebody else’s dream to begin with and already had what he’d been looking for.

Lyra's is consistently choosing children's / young adult literature. That's bound to be polarizing.

Coraline grade level, according to publisher: 4th to 7th grade
The Alchemist: 9th to 10th grade
The Wizard of Oz: 4th to 7th grade

Where's The Secret Garden???

>52 grifgon: "Lyra's is consistently choosing children's / young adult literature."

Coraline and The Wizard of Oz were certainly written as children's books, but I think it would be more accurate to say they have wide age appeal. After all, the target audience is still adult fine press collectors, with publications like The Wizard of Oz probably appealing mostly to childhood nostalgia, and Coraline having some general appeal for horror and dark fantasy readers.

I don't know that reading grade level is a great indicator, since the average adult novel is written at a 7th-9th grade reading level. I'm actually a bit surprised that The Alchemist has grade rating that high.

>53 Glacierman:

IT'S HERE !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De1LCQvbqV4

>54 NathanOv: Children's lit often does have the widest appeal. Nothing wrong with that. You're correct: Not reading level, but suggested grade level from the publishers — i.e. in what years of school they recommend the book be taught. Edited to clarify.

>53 Glacierman: Where's The Secret Garden???

If I told you, it wouldn't be a secret. (see also The Hidden Fortress, The Unknown Masterpiece)

>52 grifgon: I think that there is a general trend to do fine press versions of children's/YA lit. Besides Lyra's, Books Illustrated and Conversation Tree Press for example. This is likely because the books are short (less expensive for letterpress), lend themselves very well to illustration, and are generally very well-known, perhaps primarily for childhood nostalgia. I find this trend disappointing myself as I generally prefer adult books with, for lack of a better word, literary merit. However, I can see the reasons for doing this, it's relatively low-hanging fruit. Books like Brief Lives that Last Forever and Molly Holden's poetry just aren't going to be able to sell in the large limitations that these newer publishers/presses are doing. Having said that, it's not a guaranteed success in today's depressed market (e.g. Peter Pan).

I do think that Lyra's sells primarily on their reputation for quality rather than the choice of titles, so they could probably afford to take some "risks" at this point.

>59 punkzip: Right on.

>57 grifgon: Ah, well in that case once you hit the high-school range, you're still looking at primarily adult novels being taught.

I'm mainly talking about The Alchemist, since again Wizard of Oz and Coraline were written as children's novel(las). However, I think children's lit is used a little too much to "downgrade" books that are written for all ages, or simply lack adult themes, when at the end of the day the audience for all of these fine press editions are adult readers who continue to happily buy them.

Reading and / or teaching level ≠ target audience here.

Maybe one day we'll get a fine press edition of The Phantom Tollbooth, one of my favorite children's books.

>34 astropi: Raduan Nassar is living and would have been an instant buy for me. That's the first living Brazilian writer that came to mind for me. Most of my fave Brazilians are dead writers too.

>52 grifgon: His Cup of Rage the complete opposite of YA (and of the Alchemist), ha ha!!! A short book that maybe NRP could look at.

>63 jveezer: Sorry, NRP will actually be spending all of 2023 - 2025 producing a groundbreaking edition of The Very Hungry Caterpillar.

>64 grifgon: Woodcuts or lithographs?

>64 grifgon: Dang. I was hoping for Madeleine in full vellum, ha ha...which I actually do love.

>65 Shadekeep: Neither – copper engraving. And introduced by Christopher Ricks, as usual.

>67 grifgon: Excellent. Put me down for the Roman numeral edition with the Judi Conant solander.

>64 grifgon: Can't wait to see what awesome inventions you come up with!

>62 Shadekeep: I do find the shortage of nice editions of Phantom Tollbooth very unfortunate. (It doesn’t have to be fine press! I’d be happy with a nice Folio.)

>68 Shadekeep: Done — Great that somebody finally went for the Roman Numeral Caterpillar . Feel free to send the $4,950 by check or Zelle or however you prefer. And you can space out the other nine installments at your leisure.

>52 grifgon: "Lyra's is consistently choosing children's / young adult literature. That's bound to be polarizing.

Coraline grade level, according to publisher: 4th to 7th grade
The Alchemist: 9th to 10th grade
The Wizard of Oz: 4th to 7th grade"

Flowers for Algernon is consistently read in grades 7, 8 and 9 in the US. I didn't see any polarization in the CP group about it.

>64 grifgon: "Sorry, NRP will actually be spending all of 2023 - 2025 producing a groundbreaking edition of The Very Hungry Caterpillar."

Great, looking forward to receiving my copy in 2027.

>72 booksforeveryone: I remember one polarizer distinctly. But I'm not naming names.

>52 grifgon: Clearly meant as a swipe, but at 14 we were studying Richard III in school, for what it's worth.

>72 booksforeveryone: Packing would have to begin in 2026.

>50 GusLogan: Wait a second, you're offering a completely different analysis of the book than >51 NathanOv: is. Do you actually know what the book is about?

>71 grifgon: Payment sent, I did the full amount up front. It was worth selling that First Folio for this. I hope this purchase also gives me rights to the corresponding Roman numeral of Hop On Pop.

>72 booksforeveryone: >74 What_What: LOL!

Not meant as a swipe, children's literature is wonderful, I'm glad to see fine presses taking it on — they didn't use to. But it is polarizing, clearly.

>75 Shadekeep: Actually, the rights are for One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish. I've suddenly become interested in sea-literature after having (unrelated to your payment) bought a boat.

I still want to see a fine press The Secret Garden.

Our favorite books are Wind in the Willows, The Secret Garden and LotR. The first has been done, no way in heck the third one ever will be and that leaves the second.

>75 Shadekeep: And the lesser known sequel - Hop on Mom.

>77 Glacierman: If I remember correctly, there is one in the works. Can't say who!

>76 grifgon: Oh, I already have the Kelmscott One Fish Two Fish. No offense to NRP, but I don't think it could be surpassed. I would say do Pat the Bunny, but there's a rumor that Amaranthine is doing that next, with a live rabbit affixed to each book.

>80 Shadekeep: No worries, but I'm pretty sure collectors will still go for the NRP One Fish Two Fish, if only to maintain their rights for the upcoming Bob the Builder.

I already have several books with affixed live rabbits, so the Amaranthine will have to be a pass.

>76 grifgon:
>81 grifgon:

Thank you, Griffin!! My prayers have been answered.

>64 grifgon:
I'd like to see Where the Wild Things Are illustrated by Leonard Baskin.

>72 booksforeveryone: "Flowers for Algernon is consistently read in grades 7, 8 and 9 in the US. I didn't see any polarization in the CP group about it."

I think it is helpful to differentiate books that are typically assigned in school vs. books that kids in a particular age group might read for fun.

Books that are assigned in school, perhaps starting at the junior high level and certainly in high school, often tend to be very much adult books, which one gets more out of when rereading the books as an adult.

I recall being assigned Flowers for Algernon in 7th or 8th grade and very much enjoying it at the time. The reason I think it is assigned is for the moral questions it raises. As a high school freshman we studied Merchant of Venice - I attended a school where a large percentage of the student body was Jewish, and we had extensive discussions about the portrayal of Shylock. In later years, we read authors like Melville, Faulkner, and Joyce - writers who I did NOT enjoy much in high school and enjoy much more now.

The Alchemist is a morally simplistic book, which while often read by adults, is less adult than Flowers IMO. I don't know if any schools teach it - I certainly hope not.

My fun reading in high school was fantasy and science fiction - which in general I've had the opposite experience compared to the books I was assigned to read - the books were worse on rereading as an adult. I recall being absolutely enthralled by the Foundation Trilogy as a high school freshman. I reread this recently (FS edition) and noticed that the writing is terrible - which I did not even notice as a freshman.

>84 punkzip: I agree, but that wasn't a distinction being made in >52 grifgon:.

>79 grifgon: Which title? Secret Garden or LotR?

>2 dlphcoracl: This. I read it long ago and thought it came across as a self-help book masquerading as a novel. I found it pretty dull and wasn’t overly impressed by Coelho’s prose.

I can understand others enjoying it as a simple, whimsical moral fable, but it wasn’t for me. I don’t think anyone would call it an example of great literature. I’d second the recommendation that anyone contemplating buying a fine press edition, read it first.

>74 What_What:

Well, it’s been a while. What I describe is certainly in the book, I believe it’s basically a take on what true love is: you should definitely abandon the person you love to seek adventure, because if it’s true love they’ll be there when you get back. Didn’t convince me in my twenties, doesn’t convince me now. But you’ll notice I did say I was probably misrepresenting it!

Rich could probably create a Roman Numeral state of The Alchemist for 15K or so, and if marketed well could probably sell these. I understand there are celebrities which are huge fans of the book (Madonna, Will Smith)...

>88 GusLogan: I’m curious; with most of the ire being directed at the book’s “simplistic” message, would people be as upset at a fine press publishing the Rumi poem or the 1,001 Night’s fable?

Because I think all of the messages about “destiny” and “the universe conspiring” really need to be taken in the context of that core story and ending, which I’ve always read as “finding the value in what you already have.”

>77 Glacierman: can we do WitW bound in frog skin? I think i just came up with my next CP proposal.

>91 filox: Toadskin you mean. Much better handfeel.

>92 punkzip: As long as you don't use Cane Toad skin.

After so many people attacking the book, now I'm actually rather excited to read it!
I do think it's great when people share their INFORMED personal opinions, but in this rather overblown thread I feel that some people are being so overly judgemental that it's inappropriate. At the end of the day, no one can deny that Lyra's Press, in its short existence, is already poised to be a truly great press that will be long remembered.

>94 astropi: >95 Objectr: I'm a bit taken aback by the hurt being expressed by you two! Some people like the text choice, some people don't. What gives? I can't imagine anybody here doesn't wish Lyra's anything but profound success and joy in their bookmaking adventures.

In any event, in case my bantering with shadekeep about ridiculous books is being interpreted as a criticism of fine presses pursuing children's literature (or "all ages literature", if you prefer!) it certainly wasn't meant that way. I think recent endeavours by Mad Parrot, Hand & Eye, Lyra's, and Conversation Tree Press to publish such literature is a HUGE improvement. The fine press world is expanding its horizons. Who could complain about that?

Interestingly, when I worked at Thornwillow we did a poll of collectors to see what sort of genres they wanted to see pursued. Children's Lit placed #1. Obviously a gaping hole in the fine press world which is now happily being filled.

>96 grifgon: I'm certainly not hurt, good sir. However if I was Rich reading this thread I would be a doing a double or triple-take. I just opened this thread about noon or 1 today, only to open it again to find 45 responses -- mostly seemingly following the comment by one esteemed collector who coarsely expressed that Rich needs help in selecting his titles. To say they're less than inspired seems quite the opposite of Rich's recent interview with Collectible Book Vault, and more in line with niche collecting that is housed within this forum.

>95 Objectr: I'm with grifgon, my comments were intended entirely in jest. Well, except for The Phantom Tollbooth, which I truly would love to see a fine press edition of. But otherwise I just making lighthearted fun about book choices and press styles. Broadly speaking, I may not always like the choices a press makes, or would make different ones, but they are the ones setting type and making books, not me. So it doesn't fall to me to tell them what they should or shouldn't do, just like I wouldn't tell a painter what to paint. My direct involvement largely comes as a patron. (Though I have been fortunate to get involved behind the scenes with a few presses now.) I'll share my opinion on titles, but I make it clear that it's solely my opinion and not something I think pertains to everyone.

>97 Objectr:
Are we not all just expressing our opinions here? Nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps the wording of that one single post was a bit much, but I don’t really see why people cannot express disappointment or dislike for a choice/choices from a fine press they make purchases from…

Personally, I’ve bought everything Lyra’s has done thus far. I love Lyra’s and think Rich and his group are brilliant. And having conversed through email with him during the course of those purchases, he’s a lovely fellow. I have no problem with whatever he or any other press decide to publish. If I like it, I shall attempt to purchase it, if not, I shan’t. I won’t be in for The Alchemist because I don’t think much of the book. I said why and gave my opinion of the book. I echoed the suggestion that people should read it before spending money on it. But (aside from classic literature masterpieces) I’d suggest the same if a fine press was publishing most of my own contemporary favourites. Whether critically acclaimed novels or light genre fluff.

Aside from the one “coarsely expressed” sentiment I don’t really understand why the discussion and banter here should be frowned upon?

Well this all went a bit off the rails. But I think it's pretty clear that Rich isn't focusing on Children's literature just because he's publishing two very different books that were originally written for children, under two separate imprints. Particularly when I'm fairly sure at least one of them is read by more adults than children at this point.

I think it's just being taken as a blanket mark against the books and as implying the publisher has "juvenile" tastes (particularly alongside the discussion of The Alchemist) even if that's not what everyone meant in their comments.

>100 NathanOv: Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure why choosing Children's Lit would be a mark against a bookmaker. It's wild to me that anybody might think it is.

>101 grifgon: It shouldn't be at all. That just seems to be how a lot of people are using it. Particularly when there's really no trend in that direction for Lyra's collectors to worry about if Coraline and Wizard of Oz aren't to their liking.

The fact that there are over 100 comments demonstrates the success of Lyra’s. Some posts show support for The Alchemist, some for Oz and some for The Lost World. Posts decrying the choice aren’t negative for the sake of being negative, but disappointment that the next works won’t be for them. I don’t see how this is different from the topic for Conversation Tree, whereby all posters were impressed with the quality of their initial offering but concerns were raised over their choice of text?

>103 DMulvee:
Well said.

>105 originaux: I think this is a mischievous link! I haven’t read Dan Brown, so can’t personally speak to the quality of his writings, but do feel that sometimes popular authors are attacked and unknown writers given kudos just because of their popularity or lack of it.
I haven’t seen a nice edition of Jeffrey Archer’s ‘Not a Penny More, Not a Penny Less’ however this would be an instant buy for me. However I can’t imagine the vitriol that would be met out should a publisher announce this!

>103 DMulvee: I agree

Passionate people will be passionate about things they are passionate about. I haven't taken any of the above to be personal attacks at all. Just because a fair number of people view The Alchemist as a less than exciting selection is no knock on Rich. The disappointment stems from an appreciation of Rich's great work and a wish to see more personally valued works put out. Diversity of opinion is great, imho. Not everything has to be "stunning", "OMG", "incredible"... If you're a great Alchemist enthusiast you can view the mixed reaction as perhaps a better chance to source a copy. There's always an upside!

>108 wooter: I agree that not everything has to responded with positive comments only. I completely respect differing opinions on tastes, intepretation of books, likes etc. In fact, it is quite interesting to see how a simple tale can be intepreted so differently by people, and provoke such passionate, be it positive or negative, reactions. That is the beauty of books in a way. However, what I did not like was the condescending tone of some of the comments above.
I think this topic has gone completely off the rails now.

To get back to the topic, Rich did say there won't be much happening on the Lyra's front in 2023, as he will be focusing on Arete's projects. So I think the earliest the pre orders for the Alchemist or Wizard of Oz will be in end of 2023/early 2024. I wonder if anyone knows when Frozen Hell preorders will be?

>109 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: Yes! Looking forward to Frozen Hell. Will this be Lottery or just open orders? No rights with Arete, correct?

As to future Lyra's projects I was personally excited to see that Rich has been reading a lot of Daphne Du Maurier lately. I would love a Lyra's edition of Rebecca!

>109 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: Hand & Eye recently posted on Instagram about Frozen Hell, so it sounds like preparations are well underway on that one. Hopefully pre-orders will open soonish.

>110 wooter: Daphne Du Maurier

Don't Look Now or The Birds would be an instant buy for me!

My take is that The Alchemist is perfectly in line with the aesthetic preferences Lyra's has demonstrated so far (based on reputation; I haven't read it myself). After all, the imprint name is inspired by His Dark Materials; what do y'all expect?

Like astropi the polarization expressed actually makes me a bit more curious about the work than I was before. Though I'm not sure I want a fancy copy of it.

My one reservation about The Alchemist as a title choice comes down to aggregate utility, in that Folio Society has printed two nice versions of it already. (And maybe other publishers too?) But honestly aggregate utility can pound sand when it comes to the passion projects of artisans.

>109 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: I reckon about March for the pre-order for Frozen Hell, I'm waiting on a new paper stock from Purcell's that he's had made up and hope that it is soft enough to take a bite and hard enough to take the black and white images. Christmas Carol has taken a lot of our time in the last few months!

>110 wooter: It will be an old style open sale.

>112 Shadekeep: That's about it! ha ha ha, both Rich and I went to Venice this year and we both came back with the thought, what book is set in Venice?! And The Birds...well from an old film guy, what can you say?

>114 marceloanciano: great! look forward to it.

>116 marceloanciano: Lovely! Venice can charm the soul. Very much looking forward to Frozen Hell, and if you're really doing Don't Look Now, you can put me on that reserve list immediately. ^_^

>118 Shadekeep: Ditto. I dont think Daphne Du Maurier is in the public domain but would be well worth pursuing those rights!

>119 wooter: crossed fingers

>52 grifgon: Shakespeare is also suggested for 9th to 10th grade - though I wouldn’t suggest that this means Shakespeare should be classed as children’s / young adult literature…

Good luck getting the kids through Titus Andronicus without nightmares !

>121 antinous_in_london: I don't know, depends on the play! Romeo & Juliet is the most taught work for 9th graders in the U.S. I think it would be pretty accurate to classify it as "Young Adult". I think people misunderstand these categories: "Young Adult" doesn't mean "Only young adults could possibly enjoy this." It means, "This is suitable for young adults and older." On my last plane flight I watched The Lion King, Up, and Tarzan. All terrific films in my opinion, and all G or PG. The point I was making is that choosing children's / young adult literature is bound to be polarizing. Judging by this thread, I think that's correct.

>121 antinous_in_london: The difference being Shakespeare is suggested as 9th to 10th grade for the teaching of literature and language whereas the books Grifgon mentions are commercially written and aimed more to that age readership. Obviously, this doesn't mean that adults don't or can't thoroughly enjoy literature aimed at younger readers. I'm still a huge fan of Fungus the Bogeyman!

>7 Praveenna_Nagaratnam:

I knew Gregory Manchess by name and just looked him up to get a sense of his style again. Wow! I am definitely interested to see what he does with Wizard of Oz!

>124 amysisson: This image on his website looks Ozish. https://www.manchess.com/images/eqgrnwpi9imjrwotl29nvuov0uz0ys

The flying monkey looks quite adorable :)

>125 wooter: I just saw the image. Looks great

>123 ChestnutPress: I’m not sure Coelho would agree that he was aiming to write a children’s book when he wrote The Alchemist. When Lewis Carroll wrote Alice in Wonderland it wasn’t written as a children’s book, though it is now viewed as such (possibly in part thanks to Disney) - I’m not sure authorial intention is that relevant. Books will find their own audience whatever audience an author may (or may not) have ‘aimed’ for.

>128 antinous_in_london: Oh the Alchemist was most certainly written for adults, and I’m sure is still primarily read by adults even if it’s been taught in some high schools.

That’s part of why I find the Children’s book discussion so odd, since that’s clearly not a pattern or particularly common factor in the titles that have been announced.

It just doesn’t seem like a particular relevant way of grouping even Coraline and The Wizard of Oz, if there were any reason to group them to begin with. Both were written for very different audiences, and are now being published with different audiences in mind as well.

>128 antinous_in_london: Actually, I think you are right on The Alchemist. You also make a very good point regarding intention and audience. I think the general gripe that some collectors have regarding books such as Coraline and Wizard of Oz etc is that they aren't what you'd describe as the 'highbrow' literature that is traditionally the staple of fine press. But there is clearly demand for all, and now certainly enough of all kinds of literature in fine press to suit different tastes.

Now, if somebody could just do a particularly fine edition of 'One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich'....

>130 ChestnutPress: "Now, if somebody could just do a particularly fine edition of 'One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich'...."

Perhaps as a future Consensus Press title that you design...

>130 ChestnutPress: "Now, if somebody could just do a particularly fine edition of 'One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich'...."

I would snap that up in a heartbeat even if I had to sell my mother-in-law.
Wait...she's dead. Well...I would find a way!

>132 Glacierman: For now, I happily stick with my first English edition, which was well printed in the next town to me.

>130 ChestnutPress: You hit the nail on the head. The recent presses using traditional features of fine press bookmaking - letterpress, quality paper, fine bindings - such as Lyra’s, Curious King, the upcoming Conversation Tree Press, are simply not high brow enough for lots of people here.

I own many of the following kinds of books myself, but I genuinely feel that unless it’s a book of obscure poetry, the ins and outs of creating or selecting type, some ancient poem, or the bibliography of some long-defunct press, many here will simply not take it seriously.

They see the editorial choices of these presses as some sort of temporary and necessary evil to get off the ground until they start publishing stuff that is truly worthy and a legitimate use of the medium by which they are delivering their books. Hence the call for editorial “help” for a fantastically successful press with four sold out and highly sought after books.

Unless these presses vastly change direction, every new announcement will result in a 100 post thread exactly like this one.

Interested in the lost world. Sounds like a Christmas Carol was oversubscribed though so might be hard to get a copy in practice.

I never expect every edition (from any press) to suit me, so have no issues with his choices - I hope they all sell well so he keeps up the good work, and hopefully he hits a few more that align with my taste along the way!

>134 What_What: "You hit the nail on the head. The recent presses using traditional features of fine press bookmaking - letterpress, quality paper, fine bindings - such as Lyra’s, Curious King, the upcoming Conversation Tree Press, are simply not high brow enough for lots of people here.

I own many of the following kinds of books myself, but I genuinely feel that unless it’s a book of obscure poetry, the ins and outs of creating or selecting type, some ancient poem, or the bibliography of some long-defunct press, many here will simply not take it seriously."

That's simply not true. Not a single person has suggested that Lyra's (or any of the other newer presses/publishers) publish "book of obscure poetry, the ins and outs of creating or selecting type, some ancient poem, or the bibliography of some long-defunct press".

Obviously, all of these presses need to publish relatively well-known works, at least to begin with, as their limitations are much higher than the traditional presses like Foolscap, Barbarian, etc.

Given that only a minute portion of all available options are published in a fine press format, of course you want variety, but many presses getting into children's/YA at the same time actually decreases variety. To me, Curious King is a publisher who has done something different - publishing multiple genre SERIES in letterpress format. Whether or not one likes these series is another question, but at least no one else is doing it in letterpress format.

For my own part, I really don't have any desire to read or reread children's/YA books - I would much rather spend my time reading books intended for adults. But I don't see how people expressing their preferences for books, including criticism of the choices being made, is an issue at all. Nor do I see how criticism of a book like The Alchemist (I have a very low opinion of this book myself) makes any difference to anyone. If you love the book how is others criticizing it going to affect that?

>134 What_What: I love how it is verboten to ever criticize a book/publisher and if another poster doesn't agree they play the victim and the original poster is either ignorant, snobby or both. Yet, at the same time, it's totally fine to be passive aggressive and rude in the same post, slandering other users! So it goes.

I agree with >136 punkzip: and what you're saying is quite exaggerated. No one is either slandering books you like or asking for obscure works. Lyra to me is an interesting publisher. They are one of the best publishers around, starting to become well known, and have no trouble selling out titles, but, it's fair to say they are risk averse. Gaimen, A Christmas Story, The Lost World, Wizard of Oz, The Alchemist? Dorian Gray is their biggest 'risk' thus far. With their reputation I wish they went a little more off the beaten path like Foolscap, Barbarian, Arion, Thornwillow, No Reply, etc., but maybe I just have to get used to them picking very generic titles from here on out. And that's okay, I just am disappointed, and picking those titles will be instant sell outs for years to come; it's a very sound business model. But also lets not pretend that The Alchemist is In Search of Lost Time. I've read Da Vinci Code and The Alchemist and they are pretty similar: page turners, entertaining, easy to read, predictable, silly at times, and the reader can be distracted and not miss much. In fact, I enjoyed Da Vinci more than The Alchemist and would even have preferred they publish that.

>127 Praveenna_Nagaratnam: I'm guessing that it is not intended for the Oz release because A) I doubt he would preview it this way and B) Its a very literal interpretation of the Witch looking exactly like the witch in the 1939 film.

>137 Joshbooks1: I don't see why you are mentioning the Da Vinci Code as no fine press is planning on publishing it as far as I know? Is it because both the Da Vinci Code and The Alchemist are extremely popular books which some people have a very low opinion about?

From a Lyra's update email on The Alchemist:

Our edition is rich with artwork, featuring a stunning mix of full-colour paintings and intricate black line work. We have 24 full-page and 8 half (or third) page illustrations, plus a whole bunch of smaller pieces scattered in and around the text. For a 200 page book, this edition is absolutely jam packed with art.

Both Paulo Coelho and Gary Gianni will be signing copies of this release. Paulo will sign the Numbered and Lettered editions, while Gary will sign all three editions.

There will be 500 copies of the Standard edition, 200 of the Numbered and 26 of the Lettered. All copies will have the text and black artwork printed letterpress by Phil Abel at Hand and Eye. All colour images will be sewn into the bindings and printed litho on the Standard and Numbered editions and printed giclee on the Lettered edition.

Prices will be in line with our previous title, Coraline.

We plan to begin contacting rights holders at the end of this month, with lotteries to follow in early November.

Just curious. Is this an art book? Or something to be read? They can't seem to make up their minds....

Oh my, the illustrations (well, currently one color illustration was shown) look sublime!

>144 astropi: I like them as well, and also the relief samples they shared. I know it was a controversial title choice when announced, but I quite enjoy the book and suspect this will be a fabulous reading experience with all of Gary's illustrations.

>145 NathanOv: 100% agreed. Please remind me, out of curiosity why was it controversial? I do recall that being the case, but can't remember what people were objecting to.

>146 astropi: I think that people didn't like the writing style/translation. The books they (Lyras/Arete) do with many illustrations are fantastic, and until proven otherwise, I trust that every book they produce will be a top-notch reading experience.

>143 Glacierman: What exactly is so confusing? It's a book with lots of illustrations. You make it sound like it's a flaw.

>148 What_What: To me, it is. We have differing philosophies on bookmaking, that's all.

While I love Gary Gianni's illustrations, the books itself left me underwhelmed when I read it some years ago and it is not something I desire in a fine press edition. I'll be passing on this one.

>150 ultrarightist:

My sentiments as well. The Folio Society edition is all I need for this one.

>149 Glacierman: Fair enough.

>143 Glacierman: ‘Just curious. Is this an art book? Or something to be read? They can't seem to make up their minds....‘

Just curious. Is this a serious comment? Or piffle to be ignored? I can’t seem to make up my mind…

>153 antinous_in_london: See 149 above.

How many illustrations is a book allowed to have, to no longer count as a "readable book" ?
When is it considered an Art Book ?🤔

>143 Glacierman: This comment is verging on trolling, but ok, I'll bite. At what point exactly does a book turn into an 'art book'? Do you have a precise definition? Do they have to be one or the other? Just curious. Books fully intended to be read have been generously illustrated since books were invented. There are countless examples. There's nothing new here.

>146 astropi: The book seems to generate some strong opinions. I've never been entirely clear why but probably it's because of its huge sales - I doubt anyone would care much otherwise. One pattern I've noticed over the years is that people who come to it later in life often tend to dislike it. It's really a book to first read in your formative years, not when you're in the curmudgeonly stuck-in-the-mud phase :-). I've noticed something similar for Kerouac's 'On the Road'.

Anyway, I'll be buying mainly for the (hopefully!) work of art that Rich Tong and Gary Gianni will be producing.

>156 Levin40: I read it in my early twenties and disliked it quite strongly… there was something in the (pseudo?) spirituality suffusing the text which I found grating and in-your-face.

Having said that, I haven’t read it since, and am looking forward to re-reading it in Lyra’s edition.

>155 Ragnaroekk:
The first books were almost entirely religious. Very early prayer books and missals were heavily illustrated on almost every page.
I do not feel that a book can be over illustrated, and it is not an art book as long as there is a significant story printed with it. Even if every second page is illustrated, it can still be a "book" rather than an "art book".
The true art books have pictures with captions, a brief biography of the artist and that's about all.

The standard edition is visible here: https://www.instagram.com/p/DAqbTQbp1C2/

>156 Levin40: *sigh* We all have our opinions on things and they vary a lot. I don't expect everyone else to think like I do and obviously, they don't. Let's leave it at that.

Okay I'm glad I'm not the only one that was bothered by the comment. I just let it go because I don't want to be seen as disagreeing with too many people all the time.

When companies like Suntup stick a measly 6 illustrations in a book, it's refreshing to have other companies do twice as many, and in case like the one in question, many, many more. The story is still there - it's not a book like Nawakum's Cascadia, or the Barbarian Press Endgrain Books, where the main focus is the illustrations, with essays to accompany them.

This really seems like something that should be encouraged.

>160 Glacierman: Certainly true, we're all opinionated. And I think people should be encouraged to share their thoughts, so long as people are respectful. Most people are. I personally did not see anything wrong with your original comment. But anyway --

When I was growing up most of the books I read were either from the library, and had no illustrations apart from the cover, or cheap paperbacks, which had no illustrations apart from the cover. I had a few books aimed at children/young adults that had illustrations, but those were the exception. I think back then an "adult" book with 6 or more color illustrations would have blown my mind! Personally, I view all of these beautiful fine press books as "art books" to a degree. Let's face it, how many of us would purchase any of these wonderful fine press books we regularly purchase, if all of a sudden they had no illustrations?

>162 astropi: "Let's face it, how many of us would purchase any of these wonderful fine press books we regularly purchase, if all of a sudden they had no illustrations?"

Ashendene Press, Doves Press, Tallone, Shakespeare Head Press, Letterpress Shakespeare, Arion Press Paradise Lost, Medici Society, ...

Many, though certainly not all, of my favorite books in my collection have no or very few illustrations.

Really, the book design (which includes the illustrations) should serve the artistic vision of the edition. Sometimes pure typography shines, sometimes heavy illustration shines.

Illustrations (that is, those not to my taste) are much more likely to turn me off a purchase than push me towards one.

I’m almost like Alice on this topic: “what is the use of a book,' thought Alice 'without pictures or conversation?”… Don’t know if this is some immaturity of taste, but no matter how much my mind can appreciate exquisite typography and printing, if there are no illustrations, my heart is not in it. All of my favourite fine press books are heavily illustrated.

Though fully agree with >164 gmacaree:: if the illustrations are not to my taste, then that in itself could ruin the enjoyment of a book (eg Lyra’s Stardust and the recent FS Jonathan Strange…)

>163 abysswalker: Totally understand, and to teach their own of course. I will say that many Medici Society books were gorgeously illustrated -- their Canterbury Tales included 23 full-color illustrations by the famed William Russell Flint. I personally thought that the Folio Society rather blew it when their Letterpress Shakespeare editions had NO illustrations whatsoever. Even a frontispiece would have greatly increased my interest, but they had zero. Again, I'm super happy you're a fan, I think in general they did a fabulous job. Obviously not for me.

>164 gmacaree: I agree with that. I often think that when looking at recent Arion Press publications...

>165 BorisG: As humans we're naturally drawn to illustrations, and hey, it's not as if we're the first people to enjoy such books --
Egyptologists have discovered the oldest copy of what is being called the world’s first illustrated book, a 4,000-year-old edition of the “Book of Two Ways,” an ancient Egyptian guide to the afterlife considered to be a forerunner to the “Book of the Dead.” The text predates previously known versions by some 40 years.
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ancient-egyptian-oldest-book-1744110

>166 astropi: In a sense, early human communication was largely “illustrated”; cave paintings, rock carvings, pictograms. Text was the enhancement; today, it’s the other way around.

Good illustrations that suit my taste really enrich my enjoyment of a book. I'm highly unlikely to invest a larger sum into an unillustrated book.

There we have it: some like illustrations—sometimes its an absolute requirement—and some can appreciate a book without illustrations. Pure typography appeals to some and not to others. And it isn't that I don't like a book with illustrations—Lord knows I own a bunch—it's just that sometimes, I feel that there is an over-emphasis on illustrations at the expense of the overall design and the text itself. That is my perception and it may not be accurate, but it irritates me anyway. And sometimes, I'm just in a bad mood.....

>169 Glacierman: When there’s a witch hunt, you always find a witch :)

>170 bacchus.: Quod ita verum est.

Announcement of the Lettered edition:
https://www.instagram.com/p/DBI8Co7I9dK/?igsh=aDVlZ29kMnZ0NDU2

>172 David_Mauduit: Really nice design - probably my favorite Lyra’s lettered yet, not that I’ll have a shot at it.

And here is the numbered edition:
https://www.instagram.com/p/DBOZ29DIxL-/?igsh=emoxdTZidzZkdjA0
Also very attractive!

I love the design and the materials used. If only it were a different title.

And there’s the standard: https://www.instagram.com/p/DBbFfeJoxcf/?igsh=bzYxMGF0YTc3Z2Jv

I think I like it more than the numbered (and the text block / paper / illustrations are identical between the two). What do you think?

Yes it had been revealed by Collectible Book Vault last month. It looks nice but I still prefer the numbered. Not that I can afford it anyway.

All states look great and are nicely varied. I do think that they will look even better in the hand than they do in the photos given all the gold on display, particularly the numbered edition,

>176 BorisG: I am glad that this one appeals to me a little more than the numbered as well. Very elegant and appropriate to the text, with enough extra design to prevent it from being just another standard quarter-cloth & marble.

>176 BorisG: That looks fantastic for a standard edition.

Previous pricing (from Coraline) suggests: £200.00 Plus shipping and handling of £25 UK or £55 Worldwide which seems reasonable.

The website has been updated with more details and prices. I'm very happy to see that Rich is working to keep prices under control. I have to say that £175 for the Standard Edition is exceptional value for a book which is letterpress printed and hand-bound, and has many illustrations and hand-marbled boards. It's about the same price as the Suntup letterpress AEs - themselves good value - but with much higher specs.

I may try to make this my first edition from Lyra's, especially as the standard edition seems quite keenly priced. I've never read the book but Lyra's editions come round so rarely I'm willing to take a risk on it.

But...ochre or gold...ochre or gold... It seems the gold is buckram and the ochre normal cloth. All other things being equal, I'd take buckram over cloth but the ochre edition looks very nice with the marbled boards. Argh!

Gorgeous looking books. I have failed in the last two lotteries. Will try again. I would be very happy with the numbered or standard. As is often the case with many publishers I find the lettered edition too elaborate for my taste.

181: While Rich has managed to keep the basic price down, adding £55 for wordwide P&P and 14 % in VAT and taking into account the fact that these days £1 = €1.20 (after bank's margin: €1.23) still results in the £175 standard costing around €320 for me.

I have a dismal track record when it comes to lotteries, so I am going to have a go at both the numbered and the standard - but will likely end up looking for a standard copy on eBay.

The numbered edition is "special" to me because it includes the author's signature, and I love signatures...BUT, if I was not into that, I would definitely go for the Standard. I just prefer that design over the Numbered, although I bet in-person the Numbered is magnificent. This has happened to me a number of times where the "standard" release is preferable over the "numbered/deluxe" edition. Most recently, I have to say I prefer CTP's standard Treasure Island over the Deluxe -- but don't get me wrong, it's not like you can go wrong either way :)

Does anyone know where to find the link for the lottery form?
It should be available by now but I don't see it.

186: Go to lyrasbooks.com, click Shop and select the edition you are interested in. Lottery registrations can be found about one third down the description.

>187 supercell: I was lucky enough to secure a numbered copy through a bookseller, but frankly the standard is my preferred binding, especially with the text block entirely the same apart from the signature.

If anybody gets an ochre copy and is interested in trading + the difference in cost, feel free to shoot me a message! Probably wouldn't exchange funds until copies are in hand given the number of parties involved, though.

>188 NathanOv: I believe that when you purchase you get a choice as to which colour you want - It isn't random. So presumably anyone who chooses the ochre specifically requested that colour, so there may not be many swaps unless they really desire the numbered & missed out in the numbered lottery.

Any rough estimates to what the odds are in these draws? 2 names for every 1 book or more like 10 names to a book? Or even more?

>190 A.Godhelm: Would love to know - it's my first lottery from Lyra's.

I'm not crazy about the practice of automatically allowing Numbered state winners to also purchase a copy of the standard state. Seems like that could result in many standard editions being picked up only to resell to offset the higher price of the Numbered, but I assume there's a reason for it.

190-191: Lyra's has never revealed even approximate numbers, apart from saying that the number of applicants far exceeded the number of books. My own guesstimate would be 5-10 names per numbered and 2-3 per standard. So, the result of yesterday's numbered draw was as expected. Again. Of course, there will be a smallish second round over the weekend but no copies with rights. So, hoping for a standard copy next week. In the mad dash era, it used to be pretty easy to secure a standard copy (you just had to show up on time) - these days not so much.

>192 supercell: Thanks for the guesstimate. I guess I'll decide if this is a terrible system based on winning or losing the draw like the poor fellow over in FS. I've had to reschedule breaks at my job to hit certain releases in time for books that were gone in minutes so I know how stressful that can be. This is another kind of stress where you have no clue where the target is or your chances. Incredible buying pressure suggests the limitations could be increased but we've seen Suntup fighting with that as popularity waxes and wanes.

>191 cyber_naut: Or they could be bought by collectors as many collectors like to have both. And better to have them do it now, than to have them do it later on a second transaction, which then requires more work from Rich to reconcile.

>191 cyber_naut:
Read the standard, admire the numbered.

>192 supercell: Actually, I entered the lottery for the deluxe edition by mistake, thinking I was entering for the standard one… and ended up winning a copy with rights. To be honest, I’m not very interested in the book and don’t plan on buying it to resell, either. So, there will be a copy with rights available for the next lottery!

From FB: the Standard Edition has not sold out through the lottery and there will be roughly 75 copies put up on the website once the remaining lottery work is finished.

Great news. My name wasn’t drawn for the Deluxe, but I still prefer the lottery format over a first come first served scuttle. It’s more fair for everyone that way.

>197 mholt: I was writing a whole rant about how it seems like everyone who signed up for a draw would get one but I never got any confirmation - seems like the process is just a lot slower than for other publishers. Sounds like it's just a guy going through a lot of paperwork. Got my confirmation mail today and bought a standard edition in ochre (agonized some over the choice but finally figured the gold framing would look best as it is going to be displayed most of the time).
I have a couple of books with Gianni's illustrations already and I'm a sucker for richly illustrated books in particular. This fits that bill with 24 for 200 pages. Looking forward to summer.

>199 A.Godhelm: The timeline was clearly set out on the website so not sure what the rant would have been about or how it’s ‘a lot slower than for other publishers’ :
Wednesday 30th October – rights holder emails go out
Sunday 3rd November – rights holder period ends
Monday 4th November at 12pm GMT – lottery forms for all available editions open on the website
Wednesday 6th November at 12pm GMT – lottery forms close for all available editions on the website
Thursday 7th November – lottery winner emails go out for Lettered (if any) and Numbered editions
Week beginning Monday 11th November – lottery winner emails go out for Standard edition.
‘All of the emailing and manual invoicing will be done by myself only so I will be very, very busy. I’ll go as quickly as I can, I promise!’

Rich also sent an update in the email he sent out on Monday- it went to everyone who entered a lottery. Re the Standard edition he wrote :
“I will start sending out the Standard edition emails tomorrow (I am a little busy with Oz production today – more on that next week). I will probably have to send out the emails in batches due to the number of them, so I don’t get too bogged down and behind on the invoicing. I will likely send 100 out per day for the rest of the week. Like I say, if you entered for a Standard edition you will get one, so don’t panic if you don’t receive an email right away.”

>200 antinous_in_london: You went digging deep for a point that's not very complex, it's just more manual than I've encountered before.

>201 A.Godhelm: Not really - you mentioned you had started writing a rant & that their process seemed slower than other publishers. The timeline was clearly presented & they stuck to it. Based on the fact that they said that the processing was indeed being done by one person their timings seem perfectly reasonable, so i was puzzled at the reason for a potential rant & why you felt they were ‘slower than other publishers’ as you seemed to be criticising them for no discernible reason.

>202 antinous_in_london: Okay, but it’s still slower and more manual than most other publishers. That’s all they were saying.

>202 antinous_in_london: It's not really meant to be a critique either. It was just enough of a delay that I started getting worried I'd missed out somehow. I don't deal with small companies that often, maybe you do? Maybe you read a lot into my use of 'rant' or something, I thought the tone of the message was positive enough to where it'd read like concern, not anger. To be perfectly clear, I'm not displeased about anything. To someone worried like me, or maybe just lurking and curious, it was meant to be reassuring.

Excited for this one, it looks beautiful. Ochre is my choice and I am looking forward to it!

>205 coffeewithastraw:
Took Gold 😊

Sounds like ochre is the majority choice here. I also went with the ochre binding - but only because I have the mustard version of Stardust. Had I picked the blue variant then, I probably would have gone for gold this time (after all, there is an obvious link between alchemy and gold).

I think I will go for the gold too.
That shipping cost is so painful though! One quarter of the price of the book goes into shipping. I never payed such a high shipping cost in my life.

>208 David_Mauduit: I suspect it's because they've baked in less of the actual cost of shipping into the price of the item, judging from my own costs in sending xmas presents to people around the globe. It's a marketing psychology thing where you normally try to make shipping appear less than what it really is. Just a guess though.

>209 A.Godhelm: yes I can imagine that sending to Australia would be quite expensive. But I'm in Belgium, a 10 kg package via UPS cost less than 20 pounds then you need to insure the package but that won't add 40 pounds to the cost.

Finally decided on the gold edition. Sometimes choice can be a curse! Going to be the same again with CK’s Hitchhiker's Guide later in the month :/

>204 A.Godhelm: It’s ok - as you say the use of ‘rant’ implies criticism (not sure you can ever rant positively - it usually implies anger) which i didn’t think was warranted when timelines had been clearly set out in advance. No problem - it just made me want to spring to the defence of the publisher!