I Get Tired Of Seeing All These New "editions" Of Classic Books... Options

Just spouting off but I get sick of seeing all these old books now edited for the 3/4th time. For example, I saw Regardie's Tree of Life, and Middle Pillar, both given a huge font, tons of pictures (which are not necessarily needed in my opinion) and a lot of extra info by the editors, the Ciceros. I don't know much about them, but I wonder - why edit and add so much to some of these books?
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/tickedoff.gif)
I also think the cover art on a lot of books is hideous. Kraig's modern magick, for example, I find it to be too cartoonish and it's not something I would read in the public eye because it draws attention.

Do you all have any thoughts? Any editions of books you think are unnecessary, bad cover art, bad editing/illustrations... etc

The Cicero's (or what I know of them from their books) give me an edgy feeling. On one hand, they are informative, their style is adapted to non-academics, and the illustrations are relevant to their topics. On the other hand, they come across as pedantic New Age kooks who pass off cartoons as "serious spiritual diagrams." This leads me to think of them (and correct me if I am wrong, o ye of the Golden Dawn) as the very model of the occult pseudo-authority who thrives on looks, lore, and the awe engendered among losers for anyone who appears to have a position of respect. But my magical interests are the pursuit of success, whereas theirs is something else, perhaps illumination or experience of mystical states of consciouesness, and they might be experts in that area.

The general look and tone of modern occult books (Weiser, Lewellyn, New Faclon, et al) is something like a cross between a 5th-grade History text and a book on how to fix washing machines. Rollo Ahmed would spin in his tomb! i discovered long ago that if i wanted a mythic tome with gold plates and precious gems on the cover, filled with carefully-painted occult runes and beautiful calligraphy in colored inks, I'd have to make them myself. So I did.

Aside from the look of occult books, I think there should be a little more consideration from publishers about who edits the books. They might have a fine selling book from a popular author, but someone ought to be able to step back and say "hey that guy sells books but he's a crank and a charlatan, and has no place in the editing process." For example, Francis King (author of "Techniques of High Magic," a full chapter of which is nothing but a few paragraphs out of a fantasy novel) introduces the hardcover Liber Armadel. In the introduction to this otherwise beautifully-bound book, F. king says outright that the book is absurd and useless. What kind of an introduction is that? Can't they find someone who can do a better investigation of the contents?

This post has been edited by Imperial Arts: Mar 9 2007, 12:06 AM