> Considering the result was a very tiny Angel that doesn't
> intrude one way or the other, its clearly a compromise to
> appease the conflicting briefs that he was given.
>
> Other than aesthetic impact, I doubt he would have had an
> opinion one way or the other on whether the angel was
> actually present in the design, just where the angel can
> or can't be.
Your guess is as good as any. If I ever met him it predated the cover, so I wouldn't have been able to ask. If I met him it would have been no later than 1989.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > > > Here is the question I have most: What did Michael care
> > > if
> > > > he drew an angel or not?
> > >
> > > He didn't you stupid twat, Meat Loaf did, learn to read.
> > >
> >
> > Well, sanctimonious prick, I did, and you gave yourself
> > away that you can. I stand corrected. So then the question
> > is for Meatloaf I guess, but I think that Whelan had an
> > issue which spurred the dialogue...just a guess, but he
> > seems to favor dark angels or dragons in general. Maybe he
> > did have a prob.
> >
> >
> >
> >
|
