Oct 30

GiddyupClick for larger image

Mavis Comments: Ride ’em, Batgirl!

Published 1972

Actually, that cover IS a classical work of art!I would touch it without protective gloves.I've seen worse. Far, far, worse.Interesting, but I would still read it in public.Middlng: Neither awful nor awfully goodWould not like to be seen reading that!Awful... just awful...That belongs in a gold-lame picture frame!Gah... my eyes are burning! Feels so good!Good Show Sir! (Average: 8.19 out of 10)

Tagged with:

31 Responses to “The Witchcraft Reader”

  1. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    Doesn’t that hurt??? (on so many levels…)

  2. THX 1138 Says:

    “That’s a good Batty, show ’em your Gene Simmons impersonation.”

  3. fred Says:

    If I ever acquire a Premier League team this will be their logo.

  4. Bibliomancer Says:

    There once was a paperback witch
    Whose sweet ride was starting to itch
    But now the girl knows
    That this bat-mobile blows
    And using this witch-craft’s a bitch

  5. B. Chiclitz Says:

    What’s with the snake-like tail? Is that ballast?

  6. B. Chiclitz Says:

    “Y’know witch, we’d stop crash landing if you’d move your ass so I could actually flap my wings!”

  7. B. Chiclitz Says:

    I think the bat has bitten off her big toe.

  8. A.R.Yngve Says:

    Editorial meeting at Pan Books, 1972:

    “Mr. Haining, sir, is this really Science Fiction?”

    “Of course it is! Can’t you see the cover depicting a female astronaut riding a strange creature from another planet? Science Fiction!”

    “And then there’s our upcoming release, ‘The Tarot Card Reader’. I’ve shown it to my friend who’s into skiffy books, and he says it’s got nothing to do with the genre…”

    “Pishtosh! Tarot cards are like punch cards, only they work with super-science and ESP and suchwhatnot. Like I said — Science Fiction!”

    “Very well, sir… but I’m really not sure about this idea for a ‘Science Fiction Ouija Board game’. It sounds a bit, you know, superstitious…”

    “Of course it’s superstitious! Just like Science Fiction, with its belief in occult business like spaceships and robots and suchwhatnot. You know — like that American soothsayer, Asimov!”

  9. Francis Boyle Says:

    Further confirmation that we need a “that’s not how it works” tag.

    And a “that’s gotta hurt” one as well.

  10. fred Says:

    The dobson science fiction edition cover. I’m guessing Pan sold more copies.

  11. Anna T. Says:

    I have to wonder, are those her wings or those of her steed?

  12. B. Chiclitz Says:

    @Anna T.—that is a very good question. But what would be the point of the bat if not for its wings? Neither answer works, from an aerodynamic or anatomical perspective at least. The more I look at it, the more incoherent this cover becomes, except for the boobies; they’re coherent enough.

  13. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    @AnnaT: a bat’s wings are homologous to your forelimbs, Batty is crawling around on his (metaphorical) hands and knees! So I assume that those wings are her wings, since the idea of a six limbed bat is ridiculous.

  14. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    Also, how does Batty’s bit work?

  15. JuanPaul Says:

    Yeah, this is pretty much why I moved away from Salem, Massachusetts. All the giant bats and serpents. Didn’t mind the naked witches so much.

  16. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    I think we need to have a discussion about how Google’s Witchcraft Reader emoji is placing the bat underneath the woman, while Apple puts it on top.

  17. B. Chiclitz Says:

    @DeadSWBT—”the idea of a six-limbed bat is ridiculous,” compared to what?

    A bat with a bit?
    A Loch Ness monster-tailed bat?
    A topless bat-winged witch?
    A Science Fiction book not about science fiction?

    “Ah, Sahib, it’s just ridiculousness, all the way down.”

  18. Raoul Says:

    She’d be more comfortable if she shaved down there.

  19. Tat Wood Says:

    ‘Scuse me, miss, we’ve had a few complaints. It seems your novelty wind-break’s upset some of the kids on this beach. And it might help if you’d checked the wind-direction before you put it up. You’ll catch yer death.’

  20. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    @BC: congratulations, sir! You have found The Joke ™ ! Please tell our contestant what he’s won…

  21. Tor Mented Says:

    The wings clearly belong to the woman, not the bat. If they are flying, then the woman must be holding a wingless bat gripped between her thighs.
    Why would she do that? My guess is that she is preparing to drop it into the hair of a rival witch.

  22. B. Chiclitz Says:

    @DStuffWBT—hope it’s neither a wingless bat nor a topless witch. 😉

  23. Tor Mented Says:

    And because it is an anthology, I bet the cover is a generic illustration, and there is no story in which a naked witch dive-bombs a rival with a bat.
    But there should be.

  24. B. Chiclitz Says:

    And bat-witch had come
    With her bat dive bomb
    To shoot off the hair of her rival

    Her rival it seems
    Had broken her dreams
    By getting herself in the book

    It was labeled “Sci-Fi”
    But we all wondered why
    Since everyone knew it was fant’sy.

  25. Tor Mented Says:

    Bravo, B.

  26. GSS ex-noob Says:

    As a lady person, this cover makes me shudder. The chafing! The lack of chestal support riding something that’s flapping wings up and down! (Or plummeting)

    Why is there something around/trailing her arm? Why does it look like reins?

    Is the tail Batty’s or Bimbo’s? We can’t tell from this angle!

    It’s fantasy, all right, but I’m not sure whose.

    Yet still somehow better than the Dobson cover, with melted plastic spaceman.

    @fred (3): FC Batshit Insane?

    @Francis (9): those are tags we’d use often, for sure.

  27. Tor Mented Says:

    GSSxn: You’re right. I hadn’t thought about the jiggle factor, but now I would pay good money to see the animated version.

  28. Dead Stuff With Big Teeth Says:

    …and I’d pay good money to see Tor sit through the dubbed 4Kids version. 😈

  29. GSS ex-noob Says:

    @Tor: Her screaming in pain from the chafing and bouncing would reduce the fun. Anyway, she’d probably use that other hand to hold ’em still. Or it’s all maaaaaaaagick and nothing movies. Except the wings and tail, which we still don’t know who they belong to.

    There’s also the horrible tangles her hair’s going to get, and the headache from having that crown affixed tightly enough not to move.

    Basically, this defies all laws of physics, so she’s gotta be a witch or she wouldn’t be looking so bored and… attractive?

    @DS: Space Sheep prefers the original language and no dubbing, as we’ve seen in all the appearances of le mouton de l’espace.

  30. Tor Mented Says:

    @DSWBT: And thus dies another dream.

    @GSSxN: Now that I think about it, it would probably be similar to riding a horse naked. The rider being naked, I mean. Horses are pretty much naked all the time. The experience would probably be painful for a woman, and cause agony and sterility in a man. All in all, something that probably happens only in cheesy books and movies.

  31. GSS ex-noob Says:

    @Tor: It would be agonizing for a woman as well. And cause temporary sterility, b/c ain’t no way she’s going to do anything with that area for quite a while, not to mention picking fur out of one’s, erm, interior. It’s just asking for all sorts of infections. I doubt the hygiene of a giant bat/serpent thingy is up to spec.

Leave a Reply