Also if you consider that it was published in 1895, the decorative Victorian references fit well.

One important distinction between artists and designers is a knowledge of type. That's not a skill set that a lot of artists have if they've never done commercial design work at any point in their careers. In the case of the blue chip artists that have done book covers, I have my doubts that any art director ever sent back the mock ups with a snippy note asking Pablo if he knew what a fucking san serif was.

As dreadful as Jaclyn Santos' cover was, it did remind me of those wonderful mass market 50's paperbacks of French classics decorated with delightfully lurid illustrations of fallen women. (Still she should have been sent home for including that retarded hat in the picture. What will she do next week, a solitary rose on a piano?)

b/t/w I have no problem reading something backwards if I don't get it forwards, so I liked Judith's cover. (if I lived in NYC, I'd be crashing that viewing party too.)

Sorry, I was playing with the little thumbs on the side of each comment and gave Zachary a negative little thumb score.

I had to double my initials to sign up, but it works fine now.

Just curious, do you still retain magical editing powers over all your commenters?