A few weeks ago, I revealed the new paperback cover for Leviathan. Well, now it’s time to show you the matching cover for Behemoth Here they are together:

And here’s Behemoth on its own:

Although I loved the old cover style, this is also a really great look, especially with this new color scheme. The blue and green seems perfect for the Darwinists, just like the rusty metallic reds suited the Clankers.

But I’ll let you guys say your piece in the comments, as NO DOUBT you will.

In other news, the word “Leviathan” now has its own species, an extinct killer whale from 12 million years ago. Behold!

A skeleton of the highly predatory, 17-meter-long (55 ft) whale was discovered in Peru. It’s teeth are twice as big as those of any current-day whale, possibly because it shared the water with a prehistoric 15-meter-long shark! (Remind me not to bring my swimming gear when traveling to any era before, say, 1492.)

And what’s the scientific name of this newly discovered monster? They’ve chosen Leviathan melvillei, in honor of Moby Dick,

So study hard and grow up to be paleontologists, because the bones of a Behemoth westerfeldii would totally rock my mantelpiece.

Here’s more from BBC News.

More cool stuff soon.

This Just In:
Here’s an interview with me about the art of Behemoth and Leviathan at Suvudu.

A few months ago, Disney announced something called “The Mechanical Kingdom,” a set of collectable pins featuring steampunk versions of Mickey, Minnie, Goofy, Donald, etc. Here’s the wallpaper:

You can get more wallpapers right here.

Of course, once a massive entertainment consortium like Disney gets involved with something alternative and kewl like steampunk, it gets sort of, I don’t know, Disneyfied, and certain people will decide it’s totally over. Check out the debate raging here at Brass Goggles.

But here’s the thing: Disney has always been at the forefront of steampunk, even before there was such a thing. In our panel discussion from two posts ago, Cherie Priest and I both confessed that our nascent fixation with steampunk was inspired by 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. And we weren’t talking about Vernes’ novel or even the movie, but the frickin’ ride. And let’s not forget Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (Oops: CCBB was not made by Disney,it just feels like it was), The Rocketeer (1991), Around the World in 80 Days (2004), or even the vine-and-coconutpunk stylings of Swiss Family Robinson (1960)!

I mean, we’re talking about Disney, an organization that owns multiple mechanical Abraham Lincolns! How steampunk is that? About this much:

Image by Scott Wegener.

So let me put it this way: everyone who’s complaining about Disney’s “Mechanical Kingdom” had best step off and go learn some history. And also get used to the fact that subcultures don’t just start off cool and then go mainstream to die. Rather, cool stuff bounces back and forth between alternative and mainstream in ways that are both unpredictable and awesome.

I, for one, welcome our new mouse-eared overlords. After all, they’ve been here all along.

____________
People who know much more about this than me and have written about it more eloquently include Cory Gross and Mike Perschon. Go read them.

Really, the headline says it all: Leviathan rap. In Italian.

It’s by Mondo Marcio (autotranslated Wiki page/original Italian), and I TOTALLY have to learn the language now.

For more about the Italian edition, published by Einaudi, click here.

Needless to say, anyone translating any lines from this will win my undying gratitude.

In case you didn’t get to go to Book Expo America, here’s my panel with sf author/blogger/activist Cory Doctorow, steampunk author Cherie Priest, and New York Public Library Manager Karen Grenke. It’s an hour of us yammering about steampunk past and present, from childhood inspirations to current concerns for the genre. Check it out:

Steampunk Panel – SLJ Day of Dialog, BEA 2010 from School Library Journal on Vimeo.

For those of you in Italy, check out La Repubblica‘s Il Venerdì this weekend, and you’ll find a three-page interview/profile of me and Leviathan.

I have proof:

Thanks to Diana Cullen for this photo.

And finally, some belated Fan Art Friday! This is Deryn in her Huxley, by Quarter Teaspoon.

Check out more of QT’s work on Deviant Art.

That’s it for today, but I have something wonderful to show you early next week! Until then, have a good long weekend.

Exciting news: The US paperback version of Leviathan will have a brand-spanking-new cover.

Here is it:

Pretty cool, huh? But I’m not going to say more, because I want to hear your impressions and opinions first.

Four key points about the US paperback version:

One: It will appear on August 10, 2010, about two months before book two in the series, Behemoth, which goes on sale October 5.

Two: It will be printed on the same awesome thick paper as the hardback! You may have noticed how much heavier Leviathan is than most books its size. The paper is a brighter white as well, all the better to show up Keith’s lovely art.

Three: It will be $9.99.

Four: Alas, the glorious endpapers map will not be in color in the paperback version. Only hardback books have end papers, so the map will appear as a spread in b&w. (Otherwise the book would be noticeably more expensive.)

Update: The paperback will be almost the same format as the hb, just a bit shorter. It’s my understanding that the art won’t have to be resized. (Phew.)

And now I attempt to anticipate your questions:

The UK paperback will have a different cover altogether, not the same as this or as the hardback there. I’ll reveal it here once it’s finalized.

I’m not sure what the plans are for the Australian paperback edition. I’ll let you know.

Leviathan has also sold in France, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Russia, Turkey, Greece, Israel, and Portugal. I have no idea about pub dates or covers, except that the French edition comes out in early September from Pocket Jeunesse.

MORE NEWS SOON ABOUT MANY THINGS.

While writing Leviathan, I did a fair amount of research on women who passed as men to serve in the armed forces. I also checked out the laws about women wearing men’s clothing, to find out what would happen if Deryn were ever caught in her deception. Armed with this knowledge, I can inform you that this is a very important day . . .

It’s the hundredth anniversary of the Explicit Legalization of Pants in Kansas! (Otherwise known as ELPK Day.)

As you can see, the word “Explicit” is very important in Explicit Legalization of Pants in Kansas Day. Pants were already legal for women to wear, after all. But note that last clause: “there was no law prohibiting a woman from wearing men’s trousers, especially if she were the head of the house.”

In other words, it’s legal to dress like a man, but really only acceptable if you’re already an honorary man—i.e., a widow and a breadwinner. (Seriously, since when is something especially legal? Either it’s legal or it’s not, dude.) ELPK Day comes with certain restrictions, it seems.

Research gems like this one are what makes writing historicals so strange and wonderful. Every detail of this article reveals a bit more about the tenor of the times, and about how actions may be strictly legal, and yet still cause a stir.

I mean, clearly this woman wasn’t writing the governor of her state for fun, or for fashion advice. Was she getting hassled by her neighbors, or even the local cops, for wearing pants? And note that she wasn’t wearing pants for jury duty, say, but to work in her own damn garden.

Even more intriguing, this little story from Kansas gets a mention in the New York Times. So these sorts of conversations about the proper role and place of women must have been happening everywhere. So ELPK Day isn’t just in Kansas anymore, it’s going national!

Of course, it’s easy to laugh at this, and reassuring to think that we no longer live in a world where women have to get legal advice for something so simple as wearing men’s clothes, right?

Well, um, wrong.

Because just a few days ago, on almost exactly the 100th anniversary of ELPK Day, a student named Ceara Sturgis has found herself erased from her school yearbook. Why? For wearing a tuxedo in her senior photograph. And when I say erased, it’s not just that the school administration wouldn’t print the photograph. No, they actually deleted every mentioned of Ceara from the yearbook, even though she’s an honor student, the goalie of the soccer team, and plays trumpet in the band. (See update below.)

By the way, she’s also a lesbian. So wearing this tuxedo wasn’t about flouting some imaginary dress code, but about who she is. That’s what clothing means in all these conflicts.

After all, it’s the trousers that our unnamed widow wore while gardening that said, “Hey, I’m the head of this family. My labor is what keeps us fed. Deal with it.” And the uniform that Deryn wears that says, “I’m as good an airman as any boy, so you can all get stuffed.” And it’s the tuxedo you wear in your yearbook photo that says, “I am who I am, and twelve years in your school hasn’t changed me. So I win.”

So, yes, these Explicitly Legal Pants are very important. Because even now, a hundred years after ELPK Day, we still have small-minded people around to tell us what we have to wear, and trying to tell us who we can and cannot be.

I hope she sues the pants off them.

Update:
In the day since I posted this, the Jackson Free Press article linked to above has been updated. It seems that Ceara was included in some sections of the yearbook, including a page she paid for, but not the senior pages. Less Orwellian, to be sure, but still despicable.

And a note on dress codes: This isn’t really a dress code issue. As Fox News explains:

“[Ceara’s mother] said she met with assistant Superintendent Ronald Holloway who told her he didn’t see regulations about the issue in the student handbook.”

This was an ad hoc decision made after Ceara turned in her photo. It’s not about school administrators blindly following silly regulations, it’s about them making up silly regulations after the fact. In other words, it’s about a sustained and personal attack on one particular student in their care.

These people should get different jobs.