Did you ever decide not to read a book because...

Well crap. I don't think so. But, now that you've brought it up, I don't know. Man, I hope not.

No, I don't think I've ever done that.

And now I'm scared. I always look grumpy (Cranky, anyone? LOL) in photos.

Not to date, but if someone really looked supercilious I might think twice!

Cranky said:

I always look grumpy (Cranky, anyone? LOL) in photos.

Click to expand...

And I can look stormy. (You should see the photos of me as a kid. Move away from me fast!)

You know, Susan, I did see an author's photo where his arms are crossed and he's leaning against something and he has a smirk on his face. I did read the book, but refused to even glance at the back photo.

If I had seen the photo first--nah, I'd probably still read it, but yes, it does color my feelings toward the writer.

I haven't, but I probably would. I can't stand the way a certain popular, non-fiction author looks on his books. I've never read one and I never will. I also happen to know what his books are about so I know I'm not missing anything.

Oh, no, it's not shallow. You reacted to his mannerism, as if he's saying, "Here's my book. I'm so wonderful, I don't need you peons anyway." Maybe too, the book just didn't interest you as much, and the photo was the clincher.

stormie said:

Oh, no, it's not shallow. You reacted to his mannerism, as if he's saying, "Here's my book. I'm so wonderful, I don't need you peons anyway." Maybe too, the book just didn't interest you as much, and the photo was the clincher.

Click to expand...

What stormie said. Besides, *and I should've added this above, sorry* I almost never look at the author photo until I've finished reading the book.

Weird quirk, I know.

It's not shallow, Susan.

When you're giving up your time and thinking of the millions of reading materials to choose from, I think the little (shallow) things can be deciding factors. You have to sift some way.

added: I'm referring to non-fiction, mostly.

No offense guys... But I think that's kind of, well, superficial. You can't simply judge a person's character (and certainly not the quality of his work) based on a photo. And it's likely that the photo was professionally done, with the photographer telling the writer how to stand, whether or not to smile, what to wear, etc. The old adage, "Don't judge a book by its cover," applies here, I think...

I only buy the oldies, from the 19th century. Rather than photos they have line drawings of the author inside the book. One that stands out most in my mind is George Eliot who had a rather unbecoming profile. Endeared her to me the more, though, as I'm no looker myself ;-)

Karen Marie Moning had this pissed off look on her face for her first couple of books--but great hair!

Maybe her agent, or a fan said/wrote a comment about her expression because her newer books have a new photo, and she's smiling. Wow! Amazing how the smile transforms her face. She looks friendly now and as if she'd be easily amused by witty comments.

Oh, sure, it all sounds silly, but I do agree that their picture can have quite an impact. For instance, Mr. King & Koontz LOOK like the type authors they are: thrillers. James Patterson LOOKS like the author he is....funny how some really fit the type of stories they create.

But there's a male author, big name in fantasy, that looks so bloody arrogant...ugh. I purchase his books--I'm a major book collector--but haven't read them. I know, lame. Now, his picture doesn't stop me from buying & one day reading his work...but I have to not flip to the back of the book where I can see him. His folded arms and exrpession are so pompous....but perhaps he hated having to take a picture...that like my daughter, he's shy??

Just mi' own weirdness.

There's photos of the authors on their books? Who knew?

I'd like to dress up like a Victoria's Secret model for MY pic...

Then I thought it would be cool to dress up like the main character of my book...you know...sword & all...

Glamour Shots came to mind, but they're makeup happy...

So, at the end of the day...I simply took a pic of me at my desk--bummed I didn't wait until my office was redone--and called it a day. Hell, I even have one knee up, arm dangling over it...I figured: This is me, jeans & T-shirt, laid back, writing all day...no frills...*shrug*..you know, down-to-earth.




.....you can't see the bunny slippahs...hehehehehe

Look, if his supercilious face was enough to put you off, apparently the opening pages of the book weren't good enough to keep you reading. I mean, I can't remember ever being put off by an author photo, but surely if the book itself had been more compelling, you would have been able to ignore the author photo.

Inky said:

I'd like to dress up like a Victoria's Secret model for MY pic...

Then I thought it would be cool to dress up like the main character of my book...you know...sword & all...

Glamour Shots came to mind, but they're makeup happy...

So, at the end of the day...I simply took a pic of me at my desk--bummed I didn't wait until my office was redone--and called it a day. Hell, I even have one knee up, arm dangling over it...I figured: This is me, jeans & T-shirt, laid back, writing all day...no frills...*shrug*..you know, down-to-earth.




.....you can't see the bunny slippahs...hehehehehe

Click to expand...

That's the best way to be. Just be yourself in your photo.

I was halfway through my second Nero Wolfe book when I happened to open up the back flap and saw a photo of Rex Stout. AGH! I seriously had to put the book down for a while, and I have intentionally not looked at it again. It wasn't that he was scary. He was... goofy, I guess. He looked like some crazy old coot from the hills with no teeth. What really freaked me out was the fact that the Nero Wolfe books contain some very old-style sexism, and while it is amusing and charming when the character Archie Goodwin evaluates the physical attributes of EVERY SINGLE FEMALE he meets - it was suddenly NOT amusing when I saw the actual real-life person behind the character. I felt like this guy was leering at me from the back of the book, rating my breasts and hair!

No, I've never put a book back because of the way the author looked on the back cover. I HAVE put back a book with an author photo on the back cover, because I couldn't figure out what the book was about. Excuse me, Mr./Ms. Publisher I don't give a rat's patoot what the author looks like, where's the little blurb that is usually on the back cover? I want to know what the book is about before I fork over $8 US.

What's up with this trend, anyway?

After having taken many many headshots, and having them all turn out very different from each other, I just couldn't fault the author for the shot. Some authors can't afford a photographer so get a friend. Some can but the person they hire takes over the photo shoot. There are so many variables in getting your photo taken it can sometimes seem like getting a good one is pretty much close to a miracle.

Observe too how as authors grow more famous their pictures change. This has everything to do with the quality and cost of the photographer in my mind. Look at Stephenie Meyer's first headshot, then look at her current one:





I think we can have a gut reaction yes to a photograph, that is part of the artistry behind photography, but to then judge the contents of a book based on something that has absolutely nothing to do with the writing of it . .. I dunno, I'd say just don't. And if you do, force yourself not to.

Actually, I think Stephenie Meyer's first photo makes her look more approachable, like someone you'd want to get an autograph from.

I think what I hate are the books were the author's photo is on the back cover--filling the entire back cover. I go to sleep, accidently putting the book back side up on the nightstand, and on waking, practically fall out of bed when I see this huge photo staring back at me. I dunno. Author's photos belong on the inside back flap.

Oh well. Maybe I'm wrong. Someday when I'm famous, maybe I'll think differently.

I am sure people will like the first photo over the second, and others the second over the first. But the point was to demonstrate just how different the pictures look from each other, yet they are the same author who wrote the same books.

As to the location of the photograph, that isn't the author's fault. The location of the photo, heck even the photo chosen (as many authors provide more than one possibility) all of it is the responsibility of the publisher. Are we going to punish the author and the book by judging a photograph that the author in most cases had little to no control over?

It just seems weird to me.

KTC said:

Yeah...I would never do it myself. I do, though, like when there is a photo. I like to 'see' who I'm reading.

Click to expand...

One author (whom I like) looks garish in her photos. I can't look at her pic or I'd get nightmares.

I think that some of Nora R's author photos make her look like Pat Benatar, which is kinda fun.

And good old SK sometimes looks like a Who from Whoville.

Siddow said:

And good old SK sometimes looks like a Who from Whoville.

Click to expand...

Yep, more and more as he ages.