Hey Sue,
I was wondering if you could update us about the state of Blood Oath ?
If I remember well it was supposed to begin during Invincible, and end somewhere around Outcast. Since the book haven't been finished before outcast release I was wondering if it has gone to some story editing so that the book could end somewhere near Abyss so that Zekk can be included in the FOTJ story just after his return to the order (it would seem weird that he isn't mentioned in outcast and omen if he's already back in the order by then). oh and also is there an official release date for that book ?

Thanx in advance Sue

I just learned that ABYSS is coming out August 18th rather than August 25th.

One week earlier

The back cover is being worked on now....

Awesome! When do you think will be able to see it?

when we are closer to the publication of the 5th and last book, we will be looking at all five and considering where to go with them, format-wise.

Sue, could you suggest to them that they reprint a collection of all 5 in 1?

Either way, good to know that they'll look at it again.

Since I store my novels like this (old picture) I need the books to be the same size. If they are not the same size they won't fit.

I just learned that ABYSS is coming out August 18th rather than August 25th.

The back cover is being worked on now....

Back quite a long time ago a few people asked why THE CLONE WARS novelization wasn't coming out in paperback here in the U.S. since it initially came out as hardcover. At that time I didn't know and guessed that perhaps it didn't sell as well as expected, due to the economic slowdown. I should never post my "guesses." I have since spoken with Shelly at Del Rey and here's her answer:

The first Clone Wars novel was published as a hardcover because the decision was made to do the first cartoon episodes as a movie, and the feeling was that a hardcover better signaled everyone's excitement about the movie. Since the other 4 books were neither novelizations nor tied to a feature film, we stuck with our original plans to publish them in trade paperback--a first for that format in adult SW fiction. If we were to reprint the first book in mass-market paperback, it would still be a singleton; when we are closer to the publication of the 5th and last book, we will be looking at all five and considering where to go with them, format-wise.

As added info, I just found this quote from Sue from WAY back...

I just received Matt Stover's first draft of the Revenge of the Sith novelization. It's about 520 pages long at 12pt Courier.

Granted, this was a first draft, so lots could've changed. But... The final hardcover was 432 pages (1.2 ratio), and the mass market paperback was 480 pages (1.08 ratio). So using the hardcover ratio from ROTS on the Abyss manuscript, we get 400 pages. So it looks like either way, Abyss will be quite long.

Well, that's the longest so far, with Omen the shortest. Thanks, jmax.

Definitely. The ending was ridiculously anticlimactic, but the story leading up to it was great, I thought -- namely the parts with the weapons syndicate, Seff Hellin and Jadak's story.

Speaking of endings that didn't feel like endings, I'd been wondering:

MILLENNIUM FALCON SPOILERS

"Millennium Falcon" by James Luceno ends with, for lack of a better term, the entire novel having been a red herring, or a "wild Bantha chase," as Obi-Wan might say. They spend the entire novel learning a lot of great information about the Falcon's history (really intriguing stuff), but they are all chasing the MacGuffin (the "treasure" of the Republic Group).

However, it turns out that the "treasure" is more symbolic than of monetary value, except to a collector of Republicana. Moreover, even the symbolic and collector value is completely wiped out because the object is a forgery anyway, with the real symbol somewhere out there in the galaxy with little hint as to where it might actually be.

To many readers, we had a great novel that lead up to an ending that felt like it "just ended" with the feeling that the entire adventure had been entirely pointless.

The question then is:

I'm assuming the idea of making the "treasure" symbolic and then a forgery was the choice of the author, James Luceno, but was there any point during writing/editing when you all said, "Okay, wait, do we really want this to be fake? Doesn't that undermine the story?" or otherwise raise concerns as to the impact (or lack thereof) of the novel's ending?

I can understand wanting the treasure to be symbolic. It's been done to death already, but it's a tried and true way to end a treasure hunt without the players becoming filthy rich and changing things dramatically for future stories. But to have it not only be symbolic but also a forgery? Isn't that like having Indiana Jones seek the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail, only to discover an old hope chest and a Burger King cup?

It always seemed like an odd creative decision to me. Maybe I'm missing a critical insight that went over my head somewhere.

END SPOILERS