Sparrow (
sweet_sparrow) wrote in
books2010-06-16 01:30 pm
Cover me!
I'm curious, what's everyone's opinions on book covers?
Would you rather we return to the olden days when a cover consisted of the title and author's name or does the modern idea of pictures appeal to you? Do you base (some of) your book buys on the fact that they have a pretty cover (or, flip side, do you refuse to touch a book because you hate the cover)?
Do you want your series covers to match in style or do you just not care about the covers or way or another?
What about dustjackets? Useful or just a pain?
I'm asking because two of the books I ordered this week didn't have the cover the online stores presented me with. I was... Actually, I'm not sure what I was. Annoyed, I think. I ordered them from those sites precisely because they showed me the cover I was after.
Okay, for full disclosure, I'm talking about the old and reissue covers for Dawn Cook's Truth series. I fell in love with the reissue cover for book 4, and I do aesthetically prefer the new covers over the old ones, even if the old covers do suit the books a lot better.
It got me thinking, again, about my opinion on covers and how they affect my bookish habits.
For series, I definitely like my covers to match if at all possible, but it's more important that the books are all the same size. Matching covers just look neater and tidier on the shelves. (This includes series comprised of stand-alone books like the Penguin Classics.)
For stand-alone books I'm a lot more... open? I don't get swayed to buy or not-buy books based on the cover and it's only in recenter years that I've even begun to really notice covers. A pretty cover does not an interesting book make.
Yet, that said, if I know I'm going to buy a specific book and there are multiple covers available I'm liable to go for the one that I think is prettiest. It depends on whether I think the pretty is worth the price difference.
I can definitely be a cover snob at times, though to date I've only replaced six covers with prettier, Shanra-friendlier ones. (And five of those six books came in the same boxset!) And sometimes I'll (try to) track down specific covers for nostalgia reasons, but this is fairly rare since 'nostalgia' tends to include 'Dutch' for me and I've pretty much stopped reading in my native language.
Some of my books are old enough to have come without dust jackets - or at least old enough to pretend they did - and there is something I find incredibly appealing about them. ^-^ No idea what it is, though. I don't think I'd be happy to see cover images disappear, but I can't say I'd mind terribly either.
And I dislike dust jackets. They keep slipping and sliding around my book. Gah!
Would you rather we return to the olden days when a cover consisted of the title and author's name or does the modern idea of pictures appeal to you? Do you base (some of) your book buys on the fact that they have a pretty cover (or, flip side, do you refuse to touch a book because you hate the cover)?
Do you want your series covers to match in style or do you just not care about the covers or way or another?
What about dustjackets? Useful or just a pain?
I'm asking because two of the books I ordered this week didn't have the cover the online stores presented me with. I was... Actually, I'm not sure what I was. Annoyed, I think. I ordered them from those sites precisely because they showed me the cover I was after.
Okay, for full disclosure, I'm talking about the old and reissue covers for Dawn Cook's Truth series. I fell in love with the reissue cover for book 4, and I do aesthetically prefer the new covers over the old ones, even if the old covers do suit the books a lot better.
It got me thinking, again, about my opinion on covers and how they affect my bookish habits.
For series, I definitely like my covers to match if at all possible, but it's more important that the books are all the same size. Matching covers just look neater and tidier on the shelves. (This includes series comprised of stand-alone books like the Penguin Classics.)
For stand-alone books I'm a lot more... open? I don't get swayed to buy or not-buy books based on the cover and it's only in recenter years that I've even begun to really notice covers. A pretty cover does not an interesting book make.
Yet, that said, if I know I'm going to buy a specific book and there are multiple covers available I'm liable to go for the one that I think is prettiest. It depends on whether I think the pretty is worth the price difference.
I can definitely be a cover snob at times, though to date I've only replaced six covers with prettier, Shanra-friendlier ones. (And five of those six books came in the same boxset!) And sometimes I'll (try to) track down specific covers for nostalgia reasons, but this is fairly rare since 'nostalgia' tends to include 'Dutch' for me and I've pretty much stopped reading in my native language.
Some of my books are old enough to have come without dust jackets - or at least old enough to pretend they did - and there is something I find incredibly appealing about them. ^-^ No idea what it is, though. I don't think I'd be happy to see cover images disappear, but I can't say I'd mind terribly either.
And I dislike dust jackets. They keep slipping and sliding around my book. Gah!

no subject
My sets must absolutely match: my other half and I both bought the same series of books but different sets. But I'd been desperate and bought the wrong version of one of the books, so my boyfriend had to buy the one to match my set so that we could swap. I also hate having some hardback and some softback books in the same set, and so have been known to buy hardbacks for series' I'm not too keen on just to match (and have one series unfinished because I can't bear to spend the money on hardbacks as the first book wasn't all that engaging).
I'm not really a cover snob though: if it's a new book and not part of a set I don't really care which cover I get (although if given a choice I will find the prettier cover - and the non-movie-related cover if it's a film of a book. I absolutely hate film of book covers!).
Dust jackets I don't mind. I tend to take them off when reading though, unless it's a book that won't be leaving it's place on my desk. This is particularly a great plan if the book under the dust jacket is plain and I don't want it to be obvious what I'm reading (less of a problem now I don't have regular bus journeys).
no subject
Hee! You both preferred different covers of the same series?
Oooooh! I hear you on the film covers! The only one I've ever seen that I've not minded is the cover for Hogfather.
The only time I ever got a comment on my reading in the train was when I was so engaged I could not keep quiet. Most of the books I see tend to be mainstream with a dash of English classic, though. Presumably the English-reading people are students of English, which makes me squee since I'm one. ^-^
no subject
*The one exception to this is Josh Kirby's art on the Discworld books because I adore those covers. I think the minimal black covers that came with the reissuing really don't capture the Discworld at all.
no subject
I so hear you on the Discworld covers! I have far too much loathing for my Thud! cover, poor thing that it is. It hasn't done anything to deserve it. It just... Couldn't they at least have stuck with something colourful? (I mean, I like some of the black covers I've seen aesthetically, but not for the Discworld books. It's just... wrong. I know black is supposed to be universally flattering and all, but on those books it does not work for me.)
no subject
*nods* I always think the black/dark covers don't really do Discworld justice at all. I always associate the books with bright colours because it just seems to fit better.
no subject
That's a pity. :(
They really, really don't. (That said, I like the tie-in cover for Hogfather, but that's about it for the non-bright covers I like.) Bright colours and caricature style just suit the mood and feel of (what I can feel of) the books so much better.
no subject
Heh, I'll get it eventually. >.> Just might take a while.
*nods* The cover with the cast on it? Because yeah, that one fits pretty well. *sighs* I miss Josh Kirby's art. :(
no subject
I love dust jackets, but I tend to remove them before reading the book. (I leave them on the shelf, to occupy the empty spot where the book was, so I can put the book back in its former place *g*)
I prefer sets that match if at all possible, but having a trilogy with two books matching and one not bothers me more than a trilogy with all three books non-matching. Matching sizes are more important, though! Just because it's such a pain to try to figure out how to organize a series if the books aren't the same size.
Sometimes, though, I get no choice in the matter (like when I have been looking for the nth book for ages, and then finally find it). Then I go D:, but I still get the book :D
no subject
And size matters so, so much. One day, I will replace my DWJ mass markets with trade paperbacks so my sizes match. I tend to keep horizontal stacks on my vertical ones (see aforementioned lack of space) and it is so frustrating trying to figure out the very best way to balance them!
I hate having no choice in the matter. T-T The worst, very worst, cases there are are the ones where you have no choice because there is no matching version available rather than because it's the first edition you've run into. (And I do the same thing. I made sad faces and get the book anyway.)
no subject
the only cover i hated was the hard back of future perfect: how star trek conquered planet earth by jeff greenwald. the one i picked up has a psychedelic, holographic cover that made me cross-eyed & sick to my stomach. so i took it off when i read it, but put it back on for storage.
in general i find dust jackets annoying for the same reason that you do shanra.
no subject
That would be a really good reason to hate a book cover. *nods* I admire your willingness to put it back. I'd not've had the willpower, I think. Covers should not make a person feel sick. *sad noise*
I like the idea of dust jackets and the little extra space for information they provide, but I don't think they're particularly practical.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Have you ever tried taping your dust covers on in imitation of the library covers to reduce the chance of them getting damaged when you put them on your shelf? *curious*
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think there's so much appeal to just plain covers, but I wish publishers would also put the title and author on the front instead of solely on the side.
no subject
no subject
The only time i got really obsessed by a particular cover, was an old seventies set of Agatha Christie's which had stark white covers, with the author's name at the top, book title at the bottom, and a picture of the murder weapon from the novel in the centre. It took the best part of five years trawling charity shops and jumble sales, but i eventually put a complete set together.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I get itchy when I see a cover I like more of a book I already have, but I've only got a few replacement. (And I also gifted the old ones away. ^-^ Spread the book-reading love. ^-^)
no subject
Covers are usually what gets me pick up a book and read the blurb on the back to see if I'd be interested in reading it. I judge books by their cover (and then feel a bit shallow about it) when I'm browsing in stores or libraries, but when I'm looking online covers don't matter as much to me. There are a lot of book recs around the internet and the summaries are more important to me then.