Transmutation Texas (WATCHER of the DAMNED: WATCHER Book 1)
The closer you look, the worse it gets.
| Should this cover be in the Lousies? |
Transmutation Texas (WATCHER of the DAMNED: WATCHER Book 1)
The closer you look, the worse it gets.
| Should this cover be in the Lousies? |
My great hope for this is that there is no #2. (I may be too late in hoping that.)
Everything I see is just wrong, right down to the (apparent) genre.
I think that #1 is overflowing with #2.
True that.
Is there a #3? Do I want to know what it is?
After the defeat of the Empire, Darth Maul decided to carve out an alternative career in the Wild West.
“Volumn”
Apparently nobody was watch8ng the spell checkor.
Hi Nathan! I followed you on ‘X’ to thank you for a very insightful political comment – and found this here. Better late than never💖’Volumn’ is not misspelled on my WATCHER OF THE DAMNED series; it is archaic, and a nod to my Father’s beloved antique engineering journals See:
https://experts.umn.edu/en/projects/designing-for-volumn-control-on-linear-projects-class/
https://books.google.com/books?id=IekuAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA11&dq=%22volumn%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&ovdme=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjy2t_QhOWXAxVuk2oFHcUEPBkQ6AF6BAgJEAM#v=onepage&q=%22volumn%22&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=fDUVAQAAMAAJ&q=%22volumn%22&dq=%22volumn%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&ovdme=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiG6oL1hOWXAxUTJkQIHeovN2MQ6AF6BAgIEAM#%22volumn%22
Like so many things with book cover art, having even a perceived mis-spelling can be detrimental. While you can prove that this spelling was in use in the past, it is no longer common, so it’s probably better not to use it.
I feel like this falls within the same jurisdiction as “The Tiffany Rule.” That is, even though Tiffany was a documented name in medieval times, if an author uses it as a character name in their high fantasy or historical novel, they will be laughed out of the market. No reader today will believe that Tiffany is an historical name, so it’s jars them out of the book each time it appears. Likewise, “Volumn” looks like a mis-spelling to modern eyes and leads the reader to believe the author failed to spell-check the title and thus the book.
I wonder if there are also any recognized authorities on English orthography that show “volumn” to be an acceptable alternate spelling? I could find none. Not even my 1903 Webster’s (about 5 inches thick with large, very thin pages). The 1903 dictionary predates the “archaic” examples given in the links posted above.
The closest variations I found were “volum” (Middle English) and “volumen” (Latin).
Similarly, I’ve also heard “column” pronounced as “colume.”