Saturday (3/31/2012) at the Maine Festival of the book Alma Katsu (The Taker) and Elizabeth Miles (Fury) mentioned that they have absoutely no say in their cover art! That has to be pretty freaky. I imagine it would be like allowing someone else to raise your children with no input from you. Case in point: Alma's The Taker. Perfectly lovely cover at least hinting at its Gothic nature or roots in rural, early Maine. Now the cover for the paperback which I don't think hints at anything having to do with the story but which is following this really interesting trend in covers.
THE MASK
For example we have the US and UK covers for DAUGHTER OF SMOKE AND BONE by Laini Taylor:
And then we see it again in Amalie Howard's BLOODSPELL. BTW, I talk about the festival today at FANGS, WANDS & FAIRY DUST
 |
| amaliehoward.com |
So, what's up with the MASK? They represent hiding and hidden layers, trickery, carnival. Is it replacing the formal wear trend? And here's it is again on FIFTY SHADES DARKER. Admittedly there's no head, which trashes my other theory that you at least can't not show the head with a mask. I know some of us are weirded out by the headless or partially headless guy trend.
The other trend is the young woman lying down with her head turned to the viewer or the in your face head on portrait. Anything else you have noticed lately? Do you think a book cover should be true to the book; I mean, if it's a portrait, should it represent a character or at least something to do with the story. We complain when a movie or TV show diverges from the book, why not the cover?
