[ SECRET POST #5442 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5442 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 29 secrets from Secret Submission Post #779.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. https://i.imgur.com/vj6GwK8.png

[(Anonymous)]

I agree. It seems lazy.

Like, put a knife in there if it's a murder or something. These blob covers are lazy.

I'm sure they'll go out of fashion soon, like the "hands on the cover" ones did.

[(Anonymous)]

They'll go out of fashion but something else will come in fashion and every book released will have that kind of cover instead. It's so exhausting. It makes all the books feel pointless and dull and repetitive.

[(Anonymous)]

They are at least better than woman's torso with a weapon, skinny brown leather pants and crop top, with a murky background, but with the model's head out of frame. That was a grim trend, that one. At least these have some damn color in them. For the love of god, publishers, please start hiring old fashioned water color cover artists again.

[feotakahari]

I have seen a LOT of recs from trans people who felt Detransition, Baby represented their own social experiences.

[(Anonymous)]

Seriously? Come on.

[(Anonymous)]

Rude.

[(Anonymous)]

Ooof, seems like a lot of TERFs/"gender critical feminists" are attacking it on goodreads.

[(Anonymous)]

tbh i get where theyre coming from lol

[meadowphoenix]

It's almost certainly a marketing technique, but I doubt most of these authors have a choice about it.

[(Anonymous)]

Authors in general, unless they are megablockbuster authors, have little say over cover art. If an author has cover veto, they are either up there in the GRRMartin levels of sales, or they are self published and had to commission their own art. Even then, the smart vanity publishing authors do their best to ape the current mainstream cover art trends.

As much as I hate current cover art trends, it is one area where publishers do seem to know their market. There was an apocryphal story from the old days of the romance genre where the cover art trend was for a spooky house with one lit window, a curtain in the breeze, and a rose on the cover somewhere, and the artist forgot to put the curtain blowing in the breeze on an otherwise best selling author's new book, and the publisher lost about a huge number of sales. If they think dogawful blob art is selling them books, then I guess we just have to go with that.

[(Anonymous)]

Those covers do seem kinda lazy, yeah. Remember when Twilight-esque covers were all the rage? Hopefully this trend will pass...

[(Anonymous)]

I don't like them either. The old painted covers were always my favorite; I was compelled to read them even if the story didn't sound interesting.

[tabaqui]

Well....they are awfully bright and kind of buzz-saw loud, aren't they?

I always liked the covers (like the original one for Flowers in the Attic) that had a fairly plain cover with a little window, then you opened it and there was a really detailed painting underneath.

Got so mad when a middle-school friend borrowed and then lost my copy of FitA, and the replacement book did NOT have that cover.

[(Anonymous)]

I remember those covers! They were very cool.

[(Anonymous)]

I think My Sweet Audrina had one too? 🤔

[(Anonymous)]

It's like a herd of Zebras. They're meant to stand out on a shelf or an amazon list but they all blend together.

I get you.

[(Anonymous)]

These aren't 'Pick Me Up and Read Me!' covers for me, either. If I knew the book already and liked it enough to want to buy it, it wouldn't deter me from getting it, but if I was browsing for something new, I'd likely just pass these by.

Also, I dislike it when they do a reprinting of a book I remember and change the cover to look more "modern", especially when the original cover well-represented the time it was published. Like, for The Dollhouse Murders, this: http://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9780823439843_p0_v1_s1200x630.jpg , instead of this: http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1234815658l/563899.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed OP. I'm glad somebody finally said it.

[goodbyebird]

There's always a trend going strong with book covers. Very much wish they'd keep it varied and actually try to represent the book itself.

Also some of these covers are a mess. You have to really focus to make the title out.

[(Anonymous)]

To each their own. I love the aesthetic of those covers, personally. It instantly makes me more interested in the book. Not necessarily enough to buy it, or seek it out and read it. But enough to stop for a sec and pick it up, maybe flip it over and check out the back.

[(Anonymous)]

Same. I dig the aesthetic of most of these.

[(Anonymous)]

On the other hand, you seem to know what these covers signify for you, in terms of enjoyment and quality, so they perform their function? They do tell you at least what kind of target audience these novels aim for?

[(Anonymous)]

I am pretty sure they are made by people who even couldn't get a chance to read a book and synopsis is the best you can get.
I like how they look though

[(Anonymous)]

I bet what's happening is, graphic designers who specialize in this sort of cover charge much less per cover than it would cost to pay someone to paint a proper cover