New UK cover

[Captain Tammo]

lol you couldn't just leave it at the happy theory, could you...

[JangoCoolguy]

I find it hilarious that the description mentions "argumentative stoats" helping out.

Oops!

Conveniently enough, I think this is Redwall's big 3-0! (or am I a little off)

2 years away.

Oh. Okay.

Then why a new edition now 

Money?

Thing is, they could've made more money if they'd waited. Releasing a new edition during an anniversary is usually a good move.

[Lutra]

Can't say I like it much....I'm still partial to the purple cover one I had...loaned to someone, never got it back...

[LordTBT]

Thing is, they could've made more money if they'd waited. Releasing a new edition during an anniversary is usually a good move.

They probably will. They released many editions in between the 1st and 10th anniversaries, and many editions in between the 10th and 20th anniversaries. Same thing here. Not to mention, this is a small Random House imprint. Penguin will likely cover the big 3-0.

[Edraithel]

I don't like the cover because I feel the artist overused textures to hide lacking skills to be able to shade well and make it look realistic. As for the chapter headers I wish they were more than what just looks like a tattoo design.

[James Gryphon]

Redwall itself and the scenery look pretty good, but the rest of it is some of the goofiest stuff I've seen since that German artist (the one who was responsible for this take on Redwall and this parody of Mossflower).

Martin's sword is well-known to be a type of arming sword. Here, though, at variance with every other drawing of it I think I've ever seen (including the German cover I just showed you), it is portrayed as being some sort of modern fencing sword. Even so, that's not half as bad as the character that's holding it. It's probably safe to say that this is the worst version of Matthias that has appeared on any book cover. The look of abject terror on his face is completely contrary to anything that's shown in the book. The other goodbeasts are shown as being completely passive, as in the German cover above. Also, Constance is way too tiny here. It'd have been better not to show her at all than to depict her as being the same size as Basil and smaller than the rats.

The rats on the right side (or rather their heads) are actually pretty decent. I assume the rat on the bottom is supposed to be Cluny; if so, it's interesting that he has a sword here, as (I don't have the book with me right now) I'm not sure whether he's ever mentioned as using one. It looks much more robust than the little saber that Matthias is holding.

[Romsca]

So I was able to see the other website now... those animals look way too real!

I miss the old covers

[Cornflower MM]

bleck' no!

I'll keep the old covers, thank you very much.

[Lily]

I like your choice of words, James... "goofy" sums up how I feel about it. (Sorry, Dermot Flynn...) Matthias looks like he's about to squeal and run away rather than fight. I guess it's supposed to appeal to younger readers, but I still really like the older, more realistic art. I'm also curious as to why it's 576 pages! I'm pretty sure my copy is about 350 pages. I guess they made the text really big.

I'm in favour of re-prints, though. Anything that gets more people to read Redwall is a good thing, in my opinion.

[Cornflower MM]

Yeah, I agree with you about the re-prints. But I just don't like the new covers.....It makes Redwall look like a story for one year olds!

[JangoCoolguy]

Yeah, I agree with you about the re-prints. But I just don't like the new covers.....It makes Redwall look like a story for one year olds!

You realize that the original story was made for blind kids, right?

That said, this is the kind of cutsie, kiddy bad stuff associated with animal stories that's keeping the Tales of Redwall in stuck obscurity... 

[Cornflower MM]

1.) Yes. It's common knowledge.
2.) Would you please watch your language? There are younger members here!