It's not a good thing when the series that you're into suddenly changes its artistic direction on the covers. It can mess up your bookshelf. I hate it, hate it.
Take for example Yancey's YA series The Monstrumologist. When the first book came out, the cover was a bit vague, showing a beaker with something misshapen inside it. I liked it. It connoted the unknown and the mysterious.
Of course, the publishers had to change it. Now it's imperative to have that Printz seal (though well-earned, I believe) and come up with something cartoon-ish. Also, this same aesthetic is now employed in books 2 and 3. As far as I know, the original design has been totally abandoned.
Aaarghhh!
2 comments:
Hello, my friend, how's things? I never got too excited over this, but given your perspective, maybe I should. Of course, I buy most of my books used, and some of them have been loved almost to death; my concern has always been more that what's between the covers is intact. We used to have a theater in town that showed old classics exclusively, and their advertising tag line was "It's first-run until you've seen it." I have always carried that philosophy to books and games as well.
The only thing that really irritates me about cover art is when the artist feels that it's his obligation to "give away" some suspenseful plot point, or even the end, in his art... Just get a rope for those guys!
Hi, Jack! Yes, that kinda sucks too. I like covers that have very few elements.
Post a Comment