| re: Meeting Michael Whelan |
|
Posted by:
 |
Wilbury 10:50 am UTC 05/26/07 |
| In reply to: |
re: Meeting Michael Whelan - pidunk 10:46 am UTC 05/26/07 |
|
>
> 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.
>
Yes, of course. I don't pretend to speak fact or truth or anything other than my opinion, which comes in various shades of informed-ness.
But my point is that given as there is not one real scrap of evidence to suggest that he DID have a problem with supplying (mundane and conservative) subject matter which his client asked for, to actively take that position is a little odd. But hell, you swear blind that Jim sang all of Rory's bits. So what am I trying to accomplish here?!? :o)
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Meeting Michael Whelan - pidunk 10:46 am UTC 05/26/07 |
| Next: |
re: Meeting Michael Whelan: Complete with Proof! - pidunk 11:08 am UTC 05/26/07 |
|
| Thread: |
|