I posted the cover on July 21, 2006, and gave the book an honorable mention on December 12, 2006. Let me share some more thoughts I have about Matthew Bille’s Shadows of Existence.

Starting with the beautiful cover by William Rebsamen, there is a hint that this book contains material you don’t find in most of the run-of-the-mill cryptozoology books. I think that is the strength of Bille’s books. He takes somewhat obscure cryptids, and gives them a platform. His books are historically significant because he does an excellent job in overviewing discoveries.

What bothers me about this book is that I have trouble with the organization and relocating things. I asked Matt if there was any rhyme or reason to how this book was put together?

Matt’s reply is insightful, and also instructive to people attempting to pull together their own future books:

I thought I had the book itself logically enough laid out: Section I for confirmed discoveries, II for rediscovered or possibly extant "extinct" species, III for the classic mystery animals like sasquatch and yeti, and IV for other mystery animals. I can think of a couple of other ways I could have sliced and diced the information, such as dividing mystery animals into water and land, but I’m not sure that would have made it clearer.

I did think that I could have improved the organization of Section III, since I deal with mystery primates in three or four separate essays and sea serpents in two. I mulled over combining some of these or at least putting them in sequence, such as having the primate ones all follow one another. The book suffered a little from the author’s frustration at having it postponed over and over and trying to cut out superceded information and squeeze in some updates, and I think all that made me less likely to undertake the major effort of a structural reorgnization of Section III and the endnote and index changes that would have gone with it.

In reply, I said to Matt:

I find the book difficult to follow in its flow. Needless to say, I got the overall divisions between Sections I, II, III, and IV. But within the sections, I couldn’t understand the jumping, rather haphazardly, from one species to another. Maybe I need to go back and see if it is done chronologically, by location, or what. It just seemed to be a jumble of different stories randomly thrown at the reader, without sign posts of where you were going.

Matt wrote back:

I understand what you were saying about the lineup. Yes, the order of essays in a particular section is kind of random. For whatever reason (and I’m not sure why) I never really thought about that except, as I’ve mentioned, in Section III. I suppose I wanted to emphasize the sheer diversity of discoveries rather than lead the reader through in a more structured fashion. I’ll have to think about that for Edges of Existence, the sequel planned for the next decade.

I recommend people pick up Matthew Bille’s new book, Shadows of Existence. I only have minor reservations about it because I don’t understand the organization and have trouble finding things that I’ve read in the book. The content is superb. The book is worthy of your cryptozoology collection, without a doubt.