The Ruling Sea by Robert V.S. Redick

An okay cover (though a strange change of style from the wonderful cover for The Red Wolf Conspiracy), but the bigger annoyance is the typical North American butchering by the marketing department, changing the title to The Ruling Sea. I guess they still think we North Americans are too lacking in couth for a long, unique title like The Rats and the Ruling Sea.

You can find the cover of the UK Edition, along with a synopsis, HERE.

  • Phoenix November 13, 2009 at 12:07 pm

    maybe it wouldn’t have looked so bad if the red wolf conspiracy didn’t have such a good cover, but as it is the second in a series why not at least try to make it matching

    and i think the name change takes a lot away from the title

  • CrazYoda November 13, 2009 at 12:56 pm

    Hey Aidan, link to UK edition not working.(I am on my iPhone so maybe only on mobile theme?)

  • aidan November 13, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    Thanks for the heads up, CrazYoda.

    Found the problem and fixed it!

  • Shawn November 13, 2009 at 8:02 pm

    Looks like it matches to me. The first cover had a giant sword on it; this cover has a giant spear on it. haha Instead of ocean in the background it now has a compass. I like it.

    It reminds me of the UK His Dark Materials covers. I have a copy of this book but I still need to read the first. Gotta get on that! And Robert was even nice enough to acknowledge me in the book. Very nice of him. Nice scoop, Aidan!

  • Shawn November 13, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    By the way, those of you who get a US ARC will see a different cover for the book on the inside of the book on the first page. It has the same exact theme as the first book — spear in the middle pointing up, with a background of land it looks like. This cover may be the final one; perhaps the cover in the ARC is the final one. We’ll have to wait and see.

  • aidan November 13, 2009 at 8:52 pm

    Well that’s interesting. Does the cover inside the ARC have The Ruling Sea or The Rats and the Ruling Sea as the title?

    Also, congrats on being acknowledged in the book. Must be an honour!

  • SQT November 13, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    I’m reading “The Red Wolf Conspiracy” right now and really liking it. I agree that the title shouldn’t be changed– I can’t imagine why they think the new title would be better. It just seems bland in comparison. I’m trying to get my hands on an ARC of this one though– can’t wait to read it.

  • edifanob November 14, 2009 at 6:28 am

    Fortunately I received an ARC of the UK version of The Rats and the Ruling Sea. I posted my review over at Only The Best Sci-Fi/Fantasy.
    I can’t understand why they change the title of the book. This is confusing. I will ask Robert Redick what he thinks about it.
    This reminds me of Peter V. Brett’s The Painted Man aka The Warded Man.

    Anyway I also reviewed The Red Wolf Conspiracy and posted about The World of Robert V. S. Redick.

  • Shawn November 14, 2009 at 10:53 am

    Well, the Peter Brett title change makes sense in the US, at least to me. The term ‘painted man’ is another word for American Indian. It would be a misleading title to some. It’s the same reason Black Man by Richard K. Morgan was changed to Thirteen in the US as well. Sensitivity.

    That said, I don’t know why the title was changed for Robert’s book. The ARC I have has the title as The Rats & the Ruling Sea, but the cover of the ARC has a white sticker placed over it with the new title, The Ruling Sea. Personally I love both titles and both work, although adding The Rats increases the fantasy feel of the book. The Ruling Sea by itself lets the reader know that the sea is in charge and all upon it might live, might die, but all must show deference to it.

  • Shawn November 14, 2009 at 10:57 am

    Aidan, the black and white grainy image of the “original” US cover inside the ARC has the title including Rats. So it might be the first cover they put together and decided against.

    As far as the acknowledgment goes, it’s very cool. It’s also very weird going to Amazon, typing in my name, and having three or four acknowledgments come up. Glad I can help people out and embarrassing to receive such nods.

  • Peter V. Brett November 18, 2009 at 8:03 am

    For the record, I’ve never heard “Painted Man” used to describe American Indians, and that certainly never came up as a reason for the title change unless it was something done behind closed doors. There’s absolutely nothing insensitive about that title, and I think it’s ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

  • Peter V. Brett November 18, 2009 at 8:05 am

    And really, if we’re being sensitive, shouldn’t that be Native Americans?