Tudor History Lovers discussion
Tudor Book Recomendations
>
The Recent Trend Of Book Covers - not real not fake but somewhere unpleasantly inbetween
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Marie Z
(new)
Jun 16, 2010 02:20PM
I am not sure where to post this but I wonder if I am the only one who is rather unhappy about the recent trend in book covers that are sort of a photograph sort of not. I have been finding that many book covers are really unappealing lately. I would suspect that it is not the author's choice - Susan Higgenbothom's covers are always great and I wonder if she does have input. If any of you have information about the dearth of attractive covers I 'd love to hear it. I guess it's all relative - at least the are not the Bodice Ripper kind of covers that were popular in the 70's but jeez - I wish they would at least get he period clothing correct - and I am so tired of the headless people too ! Okay - that's my rant !
reply
|
flag
I noticed book covers aren't that great. I rather buy an older edition with a cooler cover than a new edition with an awful cover.
There have been a LOT of headless covers lately!! As a photographer, I can kinda tell ya how its done. The publisher puts out a bulletin to all the photographers they have on their lists with a description of a cover that they want to see. Photographers send in their images and the publishers pick the one that they feel fits the best. One email that my professor recently received from a publisher read something like this:wanted, an image for a book cover MUST INCLUDE some sort of apple etc....
I think, though, that some authors do have input because on the cover of Lady Elizabeth by Alison Weir that I have, it shows a young girl running through the great hall of Hampton Court. She's in period dress and the tapestry next to her is one that Henry VIII had commissioned.
There's an entire list on Listopia devoted to all the weird headless covers - http://www.goodreads.com/list/show/35... (Dude, Where's My Forehead?)I'm not a big fan of them generally.
Heck! I went to photography school - maybe I should try that too! LOL I could even make a periood dress ande Photohop a place into it. Years ago when I managed bookstores it always impressed my that the right cover could really sell a book - or the wrong cover damage sales.Sorry for mispellings - still foggy and dlete is not working - or maybe it's just me that's not working !
Where didja go to photo school, Marie??!! I just graduated and finding a job is TOUGH. No one appreciates my photoshop skills LOL We should go into book covers together hahaha!!
Hi Aly: Went I decided to reinvent myself and leave aviation and piloting I went to Long Beach City in Calif. They had a really GREAT photo department. I was encouraged to go into portraiture - where the money is - but I did not want to do that... and yes it IS tough to get a job in the field - like any art field I guess. Don't you sometimes wish you could go back and photography the 16th century and make voice recordings of ERI et al? Sometimes I dream of what they must have sounded like! I have a feeling I might have liked Huh Bigod's voice. No - I don;t think I am really THIS crazy!!! LOL
I would LOVE to go back and photograph them!!!!! Up here the money is in weddings and I'm not big on that either. It looks like I may have to move to either Kentucky or Seattle (I have two possible jobs in each location) but both is quite a move from Montana LOL
I'm on San Juan Island - north of Seattle. I am in LOVE with Montana though. Grew up in Connecticut and NYC. I use Nikons - how bout you?
Canons LOL. San Juan Island is really pretty! I'm in love with Montana too. I don't really wanna leave but at the same time i've lived here my whole life.
I don't mind the headless covers myself as it saves the face for my own imagination but I do dislike straying from the period. I read a non-fiction once that had a battle scene on the cover from nearly 250 years into the future. Huh?
I like the headless covers too. When I read, I don't imagine faces- I know that sounds wierd, but it how my mind works. When covers have faces on them, it really annoys me because then you have that face in you're head while you're reading. I also find it easier to connect with characters if they're how I imagine them and not the cover. But I agree that having covers that stray from the time period is annoying.
I think the worst cover I've seen yet was 'The Boleyn Wife' by Brandy Purdyhttp://everythingtudor.com/bookblog/w...
SERIOUSLY??
I know Annie, like that woman looks anything like anyone! LOL
Where's her hood? And her dress isn't anything like theirs! It's just so awful it makes me cringe.
I know me too, I heard the book isn't worth the read. Are you reading it?
I was at the bookstore the other day, and I was looking around and seeing headless covers everywhere. It's rather amazing how big a trend it is, and not just in historical fiction.
I can see why a lot of them are headless, if that cover Annie posted has anything to do with it. Also, her dress looks like it's straight out of the Lord of the Rings haha.
Kelly wrote: "I can see why a lot of them are headless, if that cover Annie posted has anything to do with it. Also, her dress looks like it's straight out of the Lord of the Rings haha."LOL It does! I was trying to place it and you're right, Kelly... she could be an elf or something... if she had different ears!
Kelly wrote: "I can see why a lot of them are headless, if that cover Annie posted has anything to do with it. Also, her dress looks like it's straight out of the Lord of the Rings haha."YES! I was trying to place it. She looks Elvish!
Colleen wrote: "I know me too, I heard the book isn't worth the read. Are you reading it?"
I unfortunately did buy and read it. It was a semi okay read. The story itself is interesting because it's one I love, but the writing wasn't the best, I had to really force myself to get into the book.
That's the worst, when you have to actually force yourself to read a book. Reading is supposed to be fun!
I'm ok, I've got this Paisley Pattern padded fabric book dust cover where you can slide the front and back covers in it and never have to look at them! Keeps the book protected nicely and it has an attached thread to use instead of a bookmark. My pal from America sent it over to me last Christmas. It probably has a fancy name but I don't have a clue what to call it! Never again do I have to look at horrible covers!!!You're right, the Brandy Purdy cover looks like a constipated elf...
Just came across this thread, read the comments, then looked at that Purdy one and almost died of laughing.
An entertaining explanation of just how those headless covers might have happened: http://imprint.printmag.com/innovatio...
hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's great!!
I work in a bookstore and it is so true! It always really gets me when they get the clothing all wrong (like that Purdy cover). If the author goes to all of that trouble to make it historically accurate, how mad must they be if their cover comes out like that! It's sooo wrong!On a completely unrelated note, I came across this one the other day at work and couldn't help but laugh. I'm all for alternate history and stuff, but when you put the cover and the synopsis together, it's just so funny...
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Kiss...
annie wrote: "I think the worst cover I've seen yet was 'The Boleyn Wife' by Brandy Purdyhttp://everythingtudor.com/bookblog/w...
SERIOUSLY??"
From what I've read, author's only have so much say-so regarding covers, unless you're a PG or Follett with tons of clout. Photoshopping is everywhere and fun to spot. Speaking of the Purdy book, look at the UK cover and these other two. Methinks it's the same dress and necklace.
Dear Author and Smart Bitches catch a lot of them too.
http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.co...
I read somewhere that a book or magazine cover has only 10 seconds to make an impression on the consumer. Publishers try to lure us into picking up the book. Hence some really unlikely historically inaccurate covers. Some have nothing to do with the content inside.
Katherine wrote: "I read somewhere that a book or magazine cover has only 10 seconds to make an impression on the consumer. Publishers try to lure us into picking up the book. Hence some really unlikely historically..."Not much really changes then, as I've come across many a romance cover that screams sex and it isn't at all, and then you get the Garwood/McNaught covers that in no way indicate what kind of sexual content is in the book. Go figure.
^ Brandy Purdy is published in the UK as Emily Purdy and apparently her book is one of the worst ever published on the historical fiction thing, read all the reviews on amazon etc. Now you guys have pointed that out I am going to be seeing it all the time! Doh!
Misfit wrote: "From what I've read, author's only have so much say-so regarding covers, unless you're a PG or Follett with tons of clout."And that seriously worries me for when it's time to publish my own historical novel. I don't want a horrible cover, not after all that hard work I've put into it!
Claire wrote: "^ Brandy Purdy is published in the UK as Emily Purdy and apparently her book is one of the worst ever published on the historical fiction thing, read all the reviews on amazon etc. Now you guys hav..."I have read it (the original self pubbed version) and while it isn't the worst thing ever it certainly didn't rock my world either. The book has been scorched over at Amazon UK big time.
When it's historical fiction, I'm always a big fan of just using a genuine painting from the day. It doesn't necessarily have to be of the person the book is about (sometimes there are no good reliable paintings of people), or even something that is PERFECTLY set in the time period written about (off by 50 years or so I can handle) but something that evokes the spirit of the period/book/plot.
I agree MAP. Although i was super thrown with Julia Fox's book about Jane Boleyn and that cover. It was a painting of Jane Seymour. I don't know why that one bothered me so much more than some of the others.
Hi just joined this group and was very amused to see the headless cover discussion, especially the graphics website. I must admit to discovering the same annoying tendency when I did a recent trawl of tudor period covers for inspiration for a book I'm going to be bringing out. In fact I think I only found four covers that I would rate as close to decent. That's very disappointing with a period so rich in good quality art, illustration and buildings.
Perhaps one of the worst covers I saw recently was for a historical novel by Sourcebooks. It was a picture of a plastic figurine noblewoman! Looked like a child's toy. Not sure if it was meant to look real or like a picture. Just weird.
To MG, thank you for the reply, I find the current state of book covers is quite disturbing. I know we are all told don’t judge a book by its cover, but in the book market place the only aspect which could differentiate your book from hundreds of others is the cover. As to why almost all Tudor fiction books and quite number of the non-fictions feel the need to have headless court dresses of mediocre style is quite puzzling. One could almost see it as an automatic reaction due to a collective loss of imagination. Personally I’m going for a composition of collected items from the story with a faint background of Tudor London.
Sounds great, Greg. Can't wait to see it.
Perhaps it's a weird type of visual labeling, as with the "clinch" covers that seem to work for selling romances.
If it is allowed in the group rules I will post a link to the e book site. I hope to have it all up and running by Christmas, still going through the composition design process and the last of the umpteenth edits to check grammar, spelling, formatting and continuity. Good luck for Christmas sales
To SusannaThat could be a possibility, though even with Jean Plaidy the Tudor genre tended to have a lot more depth than dare I say it, the normal bodice ripper. However that logic would just put Tudor novels in the same basket as Romance novels and I would have thought increase the competition and reduce the exclusivity and marketing angle.
There are current re-issues of the Jean Plaidys that have the headless covers, I think, interestingly enough.I believe romance is a very successful sector of the book market, so maybe this imitation is flattery of their business model?
Perhaps, too, it's all just to draw attention away from the brain and towards those - ehem! - other parts further down that romance touches the most. (the heart I mean). So the reader knows what the book is focusing on in a kind of subliminal way. That's why it works for the publishers/sales people and why they keep on doing it.
That may be so, however we have a possible gender problem, in that both the romantically inclined and more standard tudor novels both use the same style of psuedo court dress and cleavage shot. So who are thye aiming for? If its the girls then are they hoping for the 'pretty dress and fabric allure' or maybe the coutre' stle? If it is the boys the bodice ain't near ripped enough. Even more confusing our visual stimulus is always more orientated more towards the face and eyes. So artistically or pyschologically are they being coy by hiding the face al'a viel to try and peak our interest? If so I'd rate as an advertising failure.
I think it's aimed at the girls, from looking at the titles. Perhaps so that psychologically one can put one own's head on top?
Thanks yes that would make a kind of sense, aspirational cover art to put 'you' in the story.However if the tale was about Ann Boleyn or Catherine Howard that would be an unfortunate choice.
Very ironic, though!
Anyone have any links to new books following this trend? They're fun to look at :)
Tudor History Lovers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Tudor Wife (other topics)The Virgin's Daughters: In the Court of Elizabeth I (other topics)
The King's Daughter (other topics)
Kiss of the Rose (other topics)
