« MOVIE NEWS: Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist trailer | Main | BOOK REVIEW: The Devil Wears Prada by Lauren Weisberger »
Diane Shipley on book covers (or Why I could be wrong...)
Former Trashi co-ed, Diane Shipley, has written a fascinating piece for the Guardian about book covers (perhaps you helped?).
It's well worth reading, but there was one thing that leaped out at me... The cover on the left there is the original cover of Sue Hepworth's novel, Zuzu's Petals. I like it. I think it's contemporary, mature, smart. On the right is the published cover of the same book. I think it's infantilising, condescending and old-fashioned.
Following Diane's comments on the two covers, Emma, MD of Snowbooks, publisher of Zuzu's Petals, left a staggering comment... which you can read over the cut!
... our best efforts to sub this book into retailers for 6 months with [the original] cover resulted in pre-orders for... wait for it... 19 orders. That is, orders for 19 copies. If we sold 19 copies of our books, we'd stay in business about, ooh, another two weeks. So at the very last minute, I redesigned the cover, and it was promptly selected for 3 for 2/front of store promotion in two major retailers. We've sold several thousand copies so far.
Shows what I know, eh? It's also kind of depressing, no?
What do you think?
Came straight to this page? Visit www.trashionista.com for more female fiction news, reviews and interviews.
Posted by Keris Stainton on August 4, 2008 in Book covers | Permalink
Comments
I'm with you on this. I much prefer the original cover and to honest, if I saw the new one I wouldn't even have looked at the book, even though I think I would enjoy it.
But the retailers seem to be wielding so much power at present...do they really think that readers are so dumbed down?
Posted by: Cathy | Aug 4, 2008 11:45:44 AM
Hello!
Cathy, your comment says it all -- yes, I suspect they do! It'a a harder time for them now so they're resorting to cliche and the familiar.
There's no way of knowing really, if the first cover would ahve sold as well or better, is there??
It might have appealed more to its target market, though...
Personally, I prefer the blue cover, but I think the perfect cover for the book would be somewhere in-between the two, and actually encapsulate the themes touched upon in the story (call me a crazy old fool).
This has been such an interesting and fun subject to research and write about btw -- I only wish I could share the feedback I got from authors who hated their covers (I won't, cos I promised) but it's juicy stuff! AND the majority were dissatisfied...
Keris, make sure you stay involved in the planning stages when you're published... !x
Posted by: DIANE SHIPLEY | Aug 4, 2008 1:21:11 PM
Without a doubt the photograph cover is prettier and does look more grown up, but to be perfectly honest, in a bookstore I would be one of those people drawn towards the cover with the drawing on it(pun intended).
I know these covers are cliches after so many years but let's face it, it's like a brand. Before you even read the synopsis you have a petty good idea of the tone of the book. Covers with the glamorous stick ladies let browsers know that whatever the subject, you can expect a bit of light-hearted humor on the side.
Whereas there are lots of pretty photographs on covers of other books of other genres that I've picked up and browsed through but the story and tone are not to my taste.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for injecting a bit more creativity into chick-lit covers (Like: Nice to come Home to- the couture of covers) but I guess some publishers are creatively challenged, but still want the book to get bought, so they opt for Little Miss Chicklit in her short skirt. Covers that are not as striking as the couture, but I'd still buy it.
Ps. I also agree that somewhere between these two covers would have been perfect.
Sorry for the rambling, I must have cared about this point more than I thought.
Posted by: Rachel | Aug 4, 2008 9:37:10 PM
