So, I was looking at the upcoming releases (making my list, you know - wow, I hope Penguin appreciates my business) and I started noticing some of the covers. No, no, no - not in a bad way! Just seeing the variety and wondering about it. I know everyone has different tastes and different things appeal to different people but... Let me show you what I mean. BTW, I'm not linking to the authors because I'm too lazy - you're web savvy peeps. Use teh Google!
I tried to pick some of each genre and a variety of publishers (I thought - darn those Penguin imprints) from well-established authors. Anyway, here we go:
Now, I admit, Jo G's cover is fine, in theory, but what was the marketing department thinking? What customer are they trying to attract?
Onward! The contemporaries/paranormals -
the bad (there seems to be no in-between)
Which come from same publishers, you ask? From the Penguin family: Emma Holly, Jo Goodman, Nalini Singh, Lora Leigh, Candice Hern. From Harper Collins: Stephanie Laurens, Suzanne Enoch, Rachel Gibson. From Simon & Schuster: Loretta Chase, Karen Hawkins. From St. Martin's: Cheyenne McCray, Jenny and Bob, Sherrilyn Kenyon, Lisa Kleypas. The Susan Grant book is from Harlequin (isn't the guy's back fabulous
I had more examples but I got tired. ;-) It really is just the luck of the draw (no pun intended), isn't it? At least the bad covers weren't horrifically bad (and there are plenty of places you can find the bad covers to
Some random thoughts -
> I prefer the headless covers, personally. I don't need an artist's (usually completely wrong) version of the lead couple. Apparently, I'm not alone. Yay!
> The marketing decision to do the duet of Suzanne Enoch stories (one historical and one from her contemporary Sam & Rick series) in a single volume was brilliant, says me.
What do you think about the state of covers today, peeps? Any exceptional examples to share (good or bad)?
Labels: 2 cents, book stuff, covers