Book Covers Showing Too Much

Steve 211 · Oct 5, 2005

I recently read Gary Paulsen's The River (warning - plot details to be given away here), and while it was a good YA read, the middle section completely bottomed out for me because of the cover.

The boy's out camping in the wilds with an instructor, who gets hit by lightning and goes into a coma.

The radio did not work and Brian could not call for help.
So, then what?

But you know, from the cover (and even from the title), exactly what he's going to do. So you get impatient with the kid sitting around for twelve pages - looking at a map, thinking of how to get the guy out, and finally getting the idea.

How could he?
The river. If he had a boat . . . or a raft.

Book covers have to entice readers with promises of action and adventure, but are there books you've read that gave away too much on the cover? And how do publishers actually decide how much can be given away?

aruna · Oct 5, 2005

Steve 211 said:
But you know, from the cover (and even from the title), exactly what he's going to do. So you get impatient with the kid sitting around for twelve pages - looking at a map, thinking of how to get the guy out, and finally getting the idea.
?

I agree! whoever came up with that cover should be tarred and feathered! Can't think of any similar cases right now.

Garpy · Oct 6, 2005

Is this a recent publication? Because the cover image looks very dated....sort of like an old Willard Price 'Adventure' novel.

Steve 211 · Oct 6, 2005

The book came out in '91, but yeah, it does seem like those old ones.

Paulsen's first book in the Brian series was Hatchet. The cover works very well - shows a boy, a hatchet, and a wolf. You get the setting and the theme - a survival book. But no plot giveaways.

Another in the series, Brian's Winter, also gives a good thematic summary in its cover.

The only other novel I have that seems to give away an important plot point is this one by Lynn Flewelling. Fantasy novels do need to show more - a glimpse into their world. But even with this one, I didn't know whose funeral pyre it was - just that something ominous was in the works.

Jamesaritchie · Oct 6, 2005

cover

Steve 211 said:
I recently read Gary Paulsen's The River (warning - plot details to be given away here), and while it was a good YA read, the middle section completely bottomed out for me because of the cover.

The boy's out camping in the wilds with an instructor, who gets hit by lightning and goes into a coma.

But you know, from the cover (and even from the title), exactly what he's going to do. So you get impatient with the kid sitting around for twelve pages - looking at a map, thinking of how to get the guy out, and finally getting the idea.

Book covers have to entice readers with promises of action and adventure, but are there books you've read that gave away too much on the cover? And how do publishers actually decide how much can be given away?

I loved that book. I guess I'd say I knew what he was going to do, even without the cover. It was how he did it, how well it worked, the problems he had with it that mattered. Very good cover, in my opinion. For me, it did just what a cover is supposed to do.
What bothers me is when a cover has a scene like this and it never shows up in the book.

Saanen · Oct 6, 2005

I'd think the title would give away the same information. But I haven't read the book yet so I don't know whether the river has importance earlier in the book.

henriette · Oct 6, 2005

what ever happened to books with simply the title and the author's name embossed on the cover? so many books have such horribly distracting artwork that often does not do the book in question justice. for me, it defeats the purpose of using my own imagination (especially if i were reading a fantasy novel).

my favourite covers are either portraits of people or a plain title. i take all dustjackets off my hard cover books because they look so much prettier on the bookshelf with their dark spines and metallic fonts. dustjackets are evil.

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
what ever happened to books with simply the title and the author's name embossed on the cover?

Marketing. From such a cover, you can't tell anything about the book at first glance (especially if it doesn't have cover copy). You don't even know if it's the kind of book you want to spend time leafing through to see if you'd like it. You can't tell if it's a gritty Western, elegant literary fiction, urban fantasy, or a cozy mystery.

As for book descriptions that tell too much: The editor of Kafka's Metamorphosis gave away the Big Reveal right on the cover.

Added: Oh, wait. Crap. I think that happened in the introduction to the story.

Spoiler alert

Margarat Frazer spent half of The Reeve's Tale setting up a supposed plague epidemic, only to have the cover-copy writer reveal on the jacket that it turns out to be measles. She was not happy.

henriette · Oct 6, 2005

aconite- excellent point. i guess i'm old fashioned, and am one of those who hate advertising in bathrooms and taxi cabs and the onslaught of "buy this!" in our culture today. cheesy bookcovers are an extension of this modern philosophy, i guess.

this brings up an issue for my own novel. i have very specific ideas for the artwork and cover. my novel is historical fiction set in 1835, so it is incredibly important to me that my book will have an old-fashioned cover with a pen and ink portrait of my heroine and not some windblown woman in a corset with fabio standing behind her. i feel such a cheesy cover would scare away my target audience.

how much control do authors have over artwork? would it be beneficial to include cover artwork when submitting to publishers, or would it work against me?

Jamesaritchie · Oct 6, 2005

art

henriette said:
how much control do authors have over artwork? would it be beneficial to include cover artwork when submitting to publishers, or would it work against me?

Very little to no control, though you may be able to offer your opinion. Submitting art work isn't going to help at a publisher of any real size. They have a marketing department, and pay huge money to learn what sort of cover sells.

Worry about the writing and let marketing worry about the cover. Offer an opinion, but realize that your job isn't the cover, it's what's between the covers.

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
i guess i'm old fashioned, and am one of those who hate advertising in bathrooms and taxi cabs and the onslaught of "buy this!" in our culture today.

I stopped going to movies in theaters when they started showing commercials--not trailers--before the movies. I object to paying to be advertised to as a captive audience member. (Note to others who hate this: If you manage to score tickets to advance screenings, they usually don't have commercials.)

how much control do authors have over artwork?

Very little. You can make your preferences known to your editor, who may take them into account, but your cover will be largely a marketing decision.

would it be beneficial to include cover artwork when submitting to publishers, or would it work against me?

Don't do this. It screams "amateur."

henriette · Oct 6, 2005

thank you for all the great advice. i do want to point out that the portrait i had in mind would be professionally done by an excellent portrait artist whose work i am in awe in.

i find it a little disconcerting that an author having a total vision of their book would be considered amateur. coming from a background in music, it seems strange to me that the artist would not be involved in the packaging of their work. for example, it would not be seen as an amateurish move for a musician to have specific ideas for their album art. or for an actor to have an idea of how they want to look in the headshots. in fact, it almost borders on professional neglect not to consider such things.

book covers are so uninspiring these days, it shocks me that an author with a fresh idea (or at least one that stands out from the rest) would be looked down upon. but, if that is the reality of the business, it's a good thing to know. thanks again

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
thank you for all the great advice. i do want to point out that the portrait i had in mind would be professionally done by an excellent portrait artist whose work i am in awe in.

If and when your book is sold, you can recommend the artist you have in mind to your editor. Including the cover art with the manuscript submission is a bad idea.

for example, it would not be seen as an amateurish move for a musician to have specific ideas for their album art.

Of course you can have ideas. No one said otherwise. But you don't send artwork with your submission--that's the amateurish part.

book covers are so uninspiring these days, it shocks me that an author with a fresh idea (or at least one that stands out from the rest) would be looked down upon.

An author who submitted cover art with a manuscript would be looked down upon, not one who had an original idea. But bear in mind that what you think is "original and fresh" may very well be stale. The kind of cover you're talking about, for example, was fashionable in the 1990s for certain kinds of books. It could seem dated now, or it might suggest a subgenre other than the one appropriate for your book.

It's a good idea to understand the why's and how's of something in a business before you decide it's dumb.

Jamesaritchie · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
thank you for all the great advice. i do want to point out that the portrait i had in mind would be professionally done by an excellent portrait artist whose work i am in awe in.

i find it a little disconcerting that an author having a total vision of their book would be considered amateur. coming from a background in music, it seems strange to me that the artist would not be involved in the packaging of their work. for example, it would not be seen as an amateurish move for a musician to have specific ideas for their album art. or for an actor to have an idea of how they want to look in the headshots. in fact, it almost borders on professional neglect not to consider such things.

book covers are so uninspiring these days, it shocks me that an author with a fresh idea (or at least one that stands out from the rest) would be looked down upon. but, if that is the reality of the business, it's a good thing to know. thanks again

You can have ideas, and you can offer them. But your idea of what looks good, and the public's idea of what they want, are likely to be very different things. It isn't about quality. The best professional artist in the world may still produce a cover that doesn't sell.

Professionalism means letting each professional do his or her job, not in trying to do it for them. Publishers spend a lot of money, exert time and energy, on research to determine what the public buys and what it doesn't. Sometimes they get it wrong, but more often than not, they get it right.

In truth, a cover that simply catches the eye from a distance through color or design can be far better for a book than a beautiful cover that doesn't.

You can always offer ideas, and if the marketing department likes them, they may go with one. Just don't count on it, and don't even think about it until someone makes an offer for your novel.

And from my experience, most musicians and actors pose when, where, and how they're told to pose. It's the professional photographer who decides which pose looks good and which sucks.

henriette · Oct 6, 2005

james- thank you for your kind and thoughtful post. it is true that actors and musicians are told where to pose etc., but at the same time their actual image and how they want to portray themselves to the public is often their choice (or it was before MTV). when the artist loses control, they seem to rebel (case in point george michael, who refused to be in his "freedom" video and eventually got into a huge fight with the record label, ending in lawsuits). it's interesting to me to compare the arts and learn the differences behind the scenes, and to ask published writers about their own feelings about creative control.

and hey, i'd never want to be seen as stepping on any professional toes. if a publisher decides publish my book and put fabio on my cover, i guess there's not much i can do about it besides grit my teeth and smile through disappointed tears.

"It's a good idea to understand the why's and how's of something in a business before you decide it's dumb."

wow aconite, i never came to any conclusions that anything was "dumb". but now i do feel a little stupid.

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
wow aconite, i never came to any conclusions that anything was "dumb". but now i do feel a little stupid.

Sorry, henriette. I thought that was implied in, "book covers are so uninspiring these days, it shocks me that an author with a fresh idea (or at least one that stands out from the rest) would be looked down upon. but, if that is the reality of the business, it's a good thing to know." If I was wrong about that, I apologize. It wasn't my intention to make you feel stupid.

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
when the artist loses control, they seem to rebel (case in point george michael, who refused to be in his "freedom" video and eventually got into a huge fight with the record label, ending in lawsuits).

The fact that this was newsworthy tells you that it's unusual. Unless you're intimately familiar with the music business from the inside, you really can't determine what *actually* goes on in the business, as opposed to what you seem to see from the outside.

henriette · Oct 6, 2005

aconite- nice. i've been around the music business my entire life (the only job my father has ever had is as a musician), worked on and off as a musician for the past decade and have many friends in bands who are slogging through the business. i've produced a cd and toured with a working band. my college education is in music theatre, another world where the struggle between "what kind of artist am i" and "what kind of artist do they want me to be?" is a big issue. what connects them all, from music theatre actors to rock bands is the constant issue of creative control. in my brain, the cover of a book is a reflection of the author like john and yoko's "two virgins" cover is a reflection of their own philosophy and of the music.

there are hundreds of examples of artists vs. corporations on the touchy subject of creative control. i used george michael as an extreme example to make my point, as everyone is aware of the brouhaha he's been through. marvin gaye went through similar problems with his classic album "what's going on"- his refusal to change any of it caused motown to shelve it for almost 2 years. etc etc. moving that discussion into the art of novel writing was my intention, as was learning a bit more about the business.

i think this is my last response in this thread as i would rather hold discussions with people who don't discredit my opinions, knowledge or background. flame wars don't interest me. lesson learned. *fin*

Saanen · Oct 6, 2005

Well, this is a very interesting and informative thread to me and I don't see any attempt to start a flame war. I hope you change your mind and continue the discussion. Sometimes it's hard to get the proper tone across in an online forum(even though we're writers--there's just something about the medium), and unfortunately innocent statements can be misinterpreted too easily.

Anyway, my own two cents: I think the industry surrounding any of the arts (literature, music, film, etc.) is a double-edged sword. That is, it does its job getting the very best work packaged and marketed so that people can enjoy it, but on the other hand it also tends to distrust the creativity that sparks the best work. I have no first-hand knowledge of the music business, but from what I've read and been told by musician friends, it has much more of a stranglehold on artistic license and creative control than the writing business does.

Aconite · Oct 6, 2005

henriette said:
i think this is my last response in this thread as i would rather hold discussions with people who don't discredit my opinions, knowledge or background. flame wars don't interest me. lesson learned. *fin*

Where did I or anyone else discredit you, your knowledge, background, or opinions? Nowhere until your last post did you indicate you had experience in any of the fields you discussed, yet we were supposed to somehow know you were an expert and give your words the weight they deserve?

If you think this was a flame war, or even the start of one, you hang out on some *very* mild-mannered boards.

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Oct 6, 2005

Slightly off-topic

Aconite said:
I stopped going to movies in theaters when they started showing commercials--not trailers--before the movies. I object to paying to be advertised to as a captive audience member. (Note to others who hate this: If you manage to score tickets to advance screenings, they usually don't have commercials.)

Do you have a Landmark Theater in your area?

www.landmarktheater.com

They seem to be a chain which acquires quirky local theaters and lets them retain their quirks. They also tend to show indie movies and limited release features. My husband and I just saw Mirrormask at the Landmark Esquire in Denver (and we're fond of the Landmark Crossings in Boulder), and there wasn't a single advertisement. Only movie previews. Previews for movies that looked darn good, in fact.

Plus, the stuff they sell at their concession stands tends to be more interesting than the usual movie fare. Mighty Leaf tea bags, locally produced snacks, refills on fountain drinks and popcorn, good happy things.

But, anyway. No commercials at the Landmark Esquire, and none of that crappy "countdown to the feature" stuff the AMC likes to do. Until the movie starts, just previews, and until the previews start, just radio-ish music.

Jamesaritchie · Oct 6, 2005

Movies

I tend to like commercials before movies for the same reason I like them on TV. . .that's when I go do other things.

As for creative control, this is more often fought over content, not periphery. Writers, actors, and singers all have times when they are willing to fight over the content of a book, a movie, or an album, but I've never known an actor to fight over a movie poster, darned few musicians who were willing to fight over an album cover, and very few writers who were willing to go to the wall over a book cover.

It's always good to have input, to be able to voice your ideas, but save the battles for the content. You may well have times when fighting over content is essential.

aruna · Oct 6, 2005

Jamesaritchie said:
I loved that book. I guess I'd say I knew what he was going to do, even without the cover. It was how he did it, how well it worked, the problems he had with it that mattered. Very good cover, in my opinion. For me, it did just what a cover is supposed to do.
What bothers me is when a cover has a scene like this and it never shows up in the book.

But for somebody who hasn't read the book, the cover is definitely a spoiler.

When my pub. was trying to conceive of a cover for my third book, my idea was a woman in a sari staning in water in front of a temple. My editor liked the idea very much, but what they finally came up with for the hardback was very far from that - it was the face of a ragged Indian girl, and the silhouette of a temple in the background; I didn't like it. The face looked too depressive.

But when the paperback came out - hey presto! Exactly what I had suggested. A pleasant surprise. (Apart fromnthe fact that the Taj Mahal is a Muslim building, and the woman is Hindu!)

Jamesaritchie · Oct 6, 2005

aruna said:
But for somebody who hasn't read the book, the cover is definitely a spoiler.

When my pub. was trying to conceive of a cover for my third book, my idea was a woman in a sari staning in water in front of a temple. My editor liked the idea very much, but what they finally came up with for the hardback was very far from that - it was the face of a ragged Indian girl, and the silhouette of a temple in the background; I didn't like it. The face looked too depressive.

But when the paperback came out - hey presto! Exactly what I had suggested. A pleasant surprise. (Apart fromnthe fact that the Taj Mahal is a Muslim building, and the woman is Hindu!)

I can only say the cover spoiled nothing for me. If something as simple as a photo on the cover was a spolier, I wouldn't have read 90% of the novels I've picked up. I strongly suspect that cover drew in a heck of a lot more readers than it frightened away.

aruna · Oct 6, 2005

Jamesaritchie said:
I can only say the cover spoiled nothing for me. If something as simple as a photo on the cover was a spolier, I wouldn't have read 90% of the novels I've picked up. I strongly suspect that cover drew in a heck of a lot more readers than it frightened away.

Well, as I said, I haven't read the book, but from the description the poster gave, I gather that "rafting someone to safety" was the solution to a story problem.. I wouldn't say the 90% of the books, or even 10% of the books I've read give away the solution to a story problem! In fact, I can't think of a single book who's cover does gives away a problem solution. Nope; i really can't.

Book Covers Showing Too Much

Steve 211

Here and There

aruna

On a wing and a prayer

Garpy

keyboard monkey

Steve 211

Here and There

Jamesaritchie

Saanen

henriette

Aconite

henriette

Jamesaritchie

Aconite

henriette

Aconite

Jamesaritchie

henriette

Aconite

Aconite

henriette

Saanen

Aconite

NicoleJLeBoeuf

a work in progress

Jamesaritchie

aruna

On a wing and a prayer

Jamesaritchie

aruna

On a wing and a prayer