In which cranky author has questions

[rolanni]

To put the questions in context...Back when Agent of Change was first published -- by which I mean 1988 -- publishers actively discouraged writers and their cover artists from speaking to each other.  It was felt, by the publishers, that writers weren't artists, had no idea what image would sell a book; and would just confuse the artist if they started talking about what the characters looked like, or what the setting was, or what the most interesting scene in the book was.

The publisher had a marketing department and an art department to address these matters.  The Art Director gave instruction to the artist, who pretty often hadn't read the book, but who worked off of either a synopsis of the scene the Art Director wanted, or who were provided with a portion of the book to give them a feel for the story and/or characters.  I think we've discussed the fact that Mr. Hickman was given exactly half of Agent of Change to work from -- and he was one of the lucky ones.  As we were, when we got recognizable characters standing in a street we had described on the cover of our novel.

This was not, I repeat, the norm.

The prevailing thought at that point in publishing history was that what was on the cover of the book and what was inside the book really didn't have that much to do with each other.  It was the art's job to tell potential readers what kind of story was lurking between the covers.  By the late 1980s, covers were getting a little more representative of content, though still tilted toward SF's perceived market -- 14 year old boys.

Let me say here that we've been very fortunate in our covers over the years.  Starting with Mr. Hickman's portrayal of a Big! Freaking! Turtle! and a woman in fighting leathers that were actually functional, pulling a gun that she seems to know how to use, with a scarf tied around her arm exactly as we had described it!  The male lead is possibly even golden-skinned, as described -- it's hard to tell in the underlighting.

There are a few of our covers that I'm not in love with, but, for the most part, characters we've described as brown -- Meripen Vanglelauf, Jela, Shan, Nelirikk -- or golden-skinned -- Val Con (who also became Asian for a run of covers, that being the result of the authors talking to an artist who had been in Vietnam, and knew exactly what golden-skinned people looked like), Aelliana, Daav, Er Thom -- or pale -- Theo, Miri -- have been painted as described.

Do the characters look exactly as I see them in my head?  No, of course not, though some renditions have come closer than others.

Do I expect the covers of our books to accurately reflect the characters as described?  Well, yes, within a range; after all, I wrote those descriptions for a reason.

When a cover falls outside that "range" is it a horrible cover?

Well, no...not necessarily.

Case in point:  The covers for the Carousel books.  I adore these covers, despite that I have no idea who the humans depicted are meant to be.  They're great covers -- dynamic and intriguing, and true in a way that mere accuracy can't convey.  They're covers that really ought to sell me some books.

So, with all that being said, here are my questions:

1.  Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?

2.  Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:

2a. The main character

2b. The setting

2c.  The kind of story inside the covers

3.  In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most?  Why?

4.  If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?

4a.  By writing to the author

4b. By writing to the publisher

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers

4d. Nothing will change, so why try?

5.  Other thoughts on the topic?  Tell me!

Comments

[sb-moof.livejournal.com]

The few times I've been upset by a cover, was when the depicted scene looked really interesting, but that scene/action could not be found in the book, even using vast powers of imagination. I guess that sort of falls into 2c, but it may very well have been that kind of book, so not completely. In general I like the covers to be drawn from the book. I want it to be a snapshot of a particular bit, that will also help me remember the book a year or two later. Even though I like them to be accurate, I don't expect them to be, and have never considered complaining to someone about a cover, outside of a gripe to a friend. Certainly would never boycott an author based on a bad cover that I know they had no say in.

[romsfuulynn.livejournal.com]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?

No.

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:

2a. The main character
Yes & No. I get cranky about whitewashing & shadowing (darkskinned characters being shown as silhouettes.) Lack of facial hair if it should be there. Clothing is semantics so the lack of accuracy doesn't bother me if it represents the story. I object to zippers and bra straps on historical novels, (An old Angelique novel had a bra strap).

2b. The setting
Maybe Spaceships when there are not spaceships are annoying.

2c. The kind of story inside the covers
Yes. There were a rash of cartoon covers that didn't belong on the books they were in.
3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most?
Kind of story - that's why the cartoon covers were so annoying.
Why?

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?

4a. By writing to the author

4b. By writing to the publisher

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers

4d. Nothing will change, so why try?
This.
5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me!

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

This is interesting, because apparently in the romance genre, writers were (and, I think, still are) given a questionnaire by Harlequin asking them to describe characters, chose scenes they'd like to have illustrated, and so on.

To answer your questions, yes, I DO want the cover to accurately represent the book, and feel that I've been ripped off when an allegedly representational cover does not, in fact, represent anything in the book. I've heard it rumored that art departments were disinclined to show people of color on the covers because their targeted demographic wouldn't buy the books. (There's a whole rant that goes in here, which we all know and I will spare you.)

Boycott the publishers who have inaccurate covers? That's difficult, because people rarely buy by publisher to begin with, or pay much attention to who the publisher is. I tend to buy by author, and by recommendation, and I won't know the cover is inaccurate until after I've read the book.

Will things change? Not from publishers. *self*-publishers, otoh, are taking more control of what goes on the cover, so I'd say that things ARE changing, piecemeal.

[spiffikins]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?

To a degree, in two ways.

One, if the author has described the main character as being a short, brown eyed, male with short black hair - don't put a tall, blue eyed blond man on the cover - unless there's one of those in the story too. Books are full of words describing people and places - use them!

The second thing I use covers for is to quickly give me a sense of what's inside. For good or bad, different genres of novels, have specific themes and types of covers - in many ways this is sad, because there are only so many ways you can have the same bare chested man with woman, or woman with tattoo and no head covers - but - and this is key for marketing - if I own 72 books with a headless woman with tattoo - when I see a new one, I am more likely to pick it up and read the blurb - because it's a book for Me. Especially if it's an author I don't recognize.


2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:

2a. The main character

2b. The setting

2c. The kind of story inside the covers

Not really - for any of a/b/c

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most? Why?

Because I have switched to ebooks - I use the cover when browsing book review blogs/amazon etc - the cover will make me read the blurb - but the blurb/review will be what makes me choose the book. Once it's on my ereader, however, I never look at the cover again - so it's unlikely that once I've read the book, that I will go back to the cover and compare what I read to the cover to get upset or not.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?

4a. By writing to the author

I've read enough frustrated blog posts from a variety of authors to Know that this is not helpful. Unless I'm writing in sympathy :D



4b. By writing to the publisher

Probably the right answer, but I'm unlkely to do it.

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers

And, miss out on good books for a cover I won't even look at again? Not likely.

4d. Nothing will change, so why try?

Bingo. Covers are for marketing - not for describing specifically what's in the book.

5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me!

Covers have a purpose - and that purpose is to sell books. I have found new authors specifically by picking up a book because the cover looked like "the kind of book I like" - and in a world of more books than I can possible ever read (although I'm sure trying!) I do need to be able to filter through the noise!

[alicebentley]

This deserves a dissertation, but I only have time for some quick random comments right now.
1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?
No, I don't expect it, because I've read so very many books where that wasn't the case. But I greatly appreciate it when it does.

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:
2a. The main character
2b. The setting
2c. The kind of story inside the covers
I never get upset, but sometimes I get even. It bothers me when the characters are racially different, especially in books where race was important (I'm thinking of you, first edition Dawn by Octavia Butler)
It disappoints me when the costuming and setting are radically different than the story (almost every Darrell Sweet cover - he was a great artist, and a fine guy, and books with his covers out-sold similar books with other covers by a surprising margin, but I am still sad when I see all these fine drawings of fancy court clothes on the penniless beggars in the forest)
Misrepresenting the kind of story is not just one lost opportunity, as people pass on buying a book they would have enjoyed, it's a whole host of lost opportunities, as those who DID buy a book, and then were disappointed, learn not to try things again.

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most? Why?
For any kind of "most" I have to fall back on individual cases. And this year's problems are often different from last year's.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?
4a. By writing to the author
Sometimes, yes, depending on their pull with their publisher, or if they *are* their publisher. IN most cases, no.
4b. By writing to the publisher
And talking to them at conventions, yes. And pointing out when a particularly egregious example has gotten through. The hardcover of Connie Willis's novel Doomsday Book had a striking and appropriate Michael Whelan cover. I have no idea what insanity nudged Bantam into releasing the paperback of such a grim, violent, complex novel with a pretty princess fantasy cover, complete with a rescuing prince on a horse, with a brief nod to Science, Maybe of some guys in lab coats in the corner. As I was trying to sell this book in my shop at the time, I took the option of providing a wrap-around paper strip on the covers, to let my buyers know that the contents were not representational. That worked, but ony for my one shop.
4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers
Nah, that crazy-talk.
4d. Nothing will change, so why try?
In truth, individual readers have almost no power to advance this type of change, and booksellers barely more. Things will change because change is inevitable, so it's worth speaking up now and again to try to nudge things in a better direction, but I think it would be a waste of considerable effort to try to push other people (especially huge media conglomerates that make no secret of not caring) into making it a crusade of some sort.
5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me!
Cover art used to be the main tool that readers had to decide what to try next, along with the invisible force of which titles booksellers chose to offer them. The wild ride of publishing/bookselling/online access is still changing so fast that I only want to throw out a couple of generalities: Cover art still matters very much. Having an alternate for thumbnails that isn't just a reduced version of the main art is important. And I really don't understand why, but using commonly available free fonts (especially Papyrus) just about shouts "This publisher doesn't know what they're doing - don't trust them" to me.

[martianmooncrab.livejournal.com]

I just know that the cover may or may not depict the story. I have taken to reading the first chapter in the store these days. But your books I just buy, I know what I am getting is just MORE of what I want.

I am still hoping for more of Big! Freaking! Turtle! myself.. what is not to love there...

[nicole sparks (from livejournal.com)]

Like many of the above folks, I'm resigned to inaccurate covers. I recall being a particularly offended teen when I borrowed a copy of one of Anne McCaffrey's Dragonsinger books from the library that had a red head on the cover (when the book is read first had a brunette and was *clearly* correct because I read it FIRST). I've shaken my head at covers since then but never really felt there was a thing I could do about them (other than try to hide the particularly egregious ones when reading in public).

These days I use a Kindle with an inoffensive grey cover. :) I generally don't look very closely at the cover image of a book before I buy it - instead I read the sample chapter (or however much it will let me). Or, in the case of books by familiar authors (eg. you guys) I will just buy the book and jump right in! By the same token, though, I won't watch movie versions of books I enjoyed, because they never come close to the pictures in my head and the disconnect annoys me. So maybe I'm not a very representative sample. :)

[drammar.livejournal.com]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?

I no longer expect it, but am overjoyed when a scene in the book is recognizably depicted on the cover. Or, if the cover depicts something that could have reasonably happened "off-camera."

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:
A and B are both annoying. C doesn't matter -- I don't buy a book based on the cover.

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most? Why?

If the depicted character is one that I've encountered before in another work yet in no way resembles the author's description I have to re-draw the person the first few times I encounter them -- mentally erasing the bad cover depiction and redrawing the image the way the author originally described it. If the setting I see on the cover doesn't appear -- or if nothing happens in the story that makes me believe that it "could" have happened, I just feel frustrated that the artist never read the story.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?

4a. By writing to the author -- never, unless it's self published and the author says "and I designed the cover."

4b. By writing to the publisher -- Only once

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers -- Never, because that will hurt authors, and I doubt that publishers will even notice. Besides, I'd miss too many good stories.

4d. Nothing will change, so why try? -- This mostly.

5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me! I think that you and Steve have been very fortunate for the most part. Because Big! Freaking! Turtle! was interesting (and germane to the story), and that even the Meisha Merlin covers (especially I Dare) were better than most, and that David Mattingly's cover for Ghost Ship is extraordinary. My print of that cover will always be one of my most treasured things.

[ext-1762728.livejournal.com (from livejournal.com)]

Oooh, me too - I figured Patty Briggs' stuff must be total fluff, and didn't buy any of them until I could pick the first one up used. Now I'm totally hooked.

These days I mostly look at the Amazon reviews for new books rather than covers, but I do appreciate a nice cover. If I'm uncertain, I will often wait to find a first book used, and then pick up the rest on the kindle if I like the book.

However, I picked up the Lee/Miller books because of McCaffrey's endorsement on the covers - not the picture on the cover!

[gingerwood.livejournal.com]

For me as long as the cover doesn't completely misrepresent the story, I'm ok with it. If I feel that I've been duped by the cover the most likely result is that I'll just never read that author again. I rarely pay attention to the publisher when I'm browsing. Once I've become hooked on an author, the cover art becomes irrelevant.

That said, I do wonder how may wonderful stories I've missed out on because the cover art isn't aimed at my demographic. Scantily clad women holding guns/swords/wrenches rarely cause me to pick up a book and read the blurb. It took me the longest time to pick up a Patricia Briggs book due to this.

[dormantdrake.livejournal.com]

I posted this on Steve's link this entry on FB, but I thought I'd copy it over here in case Livejournal people have anything to add:

"Good cover blurbs are far more important to me than the artwork. It's nice to have pretty and accurate art, but aside from having the function of catching my eye at a brick and mortar store I honestly tend to ignore it no matter how good or bad it is. It's the blurb that sells me on the story and makes me decide to pick it up and buy it. I do like the recent covers, but I agree with [another poster on FB] about what I consider "spoilers" on the cover."

[batwrangler.livejournal.com]

I have very low expectations for covers and I don't think I ever really expected accuracy of any kind from them. These days, I mostly buy either known authors or recommended books, so the covers play almost no part in my buying choices. I appreciate a non-embarrassing cover (basically one without gratuitous scantily clad persons on it), though, for when I'm recommending books to people I know who aren't primarily SF readers. OTOH, I do love it when the cover accurately represents a scene, character(s), or the feel of the book, and is beautifully designed. (Also, I can't stand the feel of the new "satin matte" film lam lots of publishers are using lately: it makes my skin crawl.)

[psw456.livejournal.com]

Cover art is no longer relevant to me, since I have switched almost exclusively to ebooks. Even when I seek out print books, I have made a decision to try/buy them based on reviews and recommendations from other readers whose taste seems to match mine. These days the ability to sample chapters is also a big factor.

That said - when I used to browse for new books in a brick and mortar store, I did expect that the cover would tell me the "kind of story" I was getting. I don't think that I ever had high expectations that the specifics of the cover art was particularly accurate.

If either general or specifics were wrong, it never occurred to me to complain to anybody.

[readinggeek451]

That said - when I used to browse for new books in a brick and mortar store, I did expect that the cover would tell me the "kind of story" I was getting. I don't think that I ever had high expectations that the specifics of the cover art was particularly accurate.

Ditto.

If either general or specifics were wrong, it never occurred to me to complain to anybody.

And ditto.

[otterb.livejournal.com]

And another ditto. In-store, I'd like some indication of type of story (violent, chick-lit, whatever), but it serves to get me to pick up the book to read the blurb. All of your recent covers - Liaden as well as Archer's Beach - serve that purpose for me, and are better than most.

Beyond that, I'm not strongly visual, and unless the cover is exceptional I'm unlikely to refer back to it or notice.

In any case I wouldn't complain to the author - I know they have little to no control. Doubt if I'd complain to the publisher - maybe about gender / ethnicity issues, but probably not.

[wystii.livejournal.com]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?
To a certain extent, yes. I expect it to help me differentiate between genres, at the very least. I know beautifully drawn people generally reflect a romance novel while space ships and planets are sci-fi with axes and swords hint at fantasy elements. Cowboys are pretty obvious... etc.

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:

2a. The main character
No... Except for romance novels, I don't tend to pay much attention to people depicted on covers. I prefer to have peopleless covers and even with romance books I expect the person shown to be some model rather than anyone actually in the book. A goodlooking model on a romance cover will get me to read the back more often than not, though.

2b. The setting
Yes, a little. If the cover and back blurb lead me to expect a purely sword and sorcery novel, then characters pull out guns and steampunk stuff... I get very upset. But usually it has to be very, very wrong before it even hits my bothersome radar.


2c. The kind of story inside the covers
Same as above.

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most? Why?
The genre misrepresentation bothers me most because that is one of the few expectations I have for covers. If a romance novel depicts a regency scene, I expect a regency novel not a fancy dress scene in a modern novel. When that expectation is betrayed, then I get bothered. When I have no expectation of accuracy, I don't care if they get it wrong.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?
Not, really. But for the longest time, when given a choice between a british publisher with a scenic cover that gives me a good feel for the genre and an american publisher with a character cover of dubious accuracy for the same novel, I would buy the british edition. I believe to some extent where I spend my money counts a little at least.

4a. By writing to the author
Why bother when an artist's depiction of a scene is based on the artist's perceptions and not the author's fault.

4b. By writing to the publisher
I believe that letters of complaint to publishers get filed in the round filing cabinet called a garbage or recycling bin.

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers
I don't boycot authors and if I have a choice of publisher I will buy from the one with the covers I prefer. If I have no choice, I make sure the book is not visible on my bookshelf when I finish reading it.

4d. Nothing will change, so why try?
Too true.

5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me!
Covers have become less relevant to me since I stopped browsing for books in a bookstore. Tags will usually give me the genre information I want and as someone else has commented, I never need to see the cover again once it is no longer a thumbnail on my ereader's homepage. While I think that sci-fi covers have improved a lot, people on covers still turn me off if I pause to look too long. It's a matter of taste and I tend not to like the style of people drawing in a lot of American covers. Regardless of accuracy or realism, I just find them ugly. (sorry) My tastes tend toward pretty manga/anime styles. I know this so I don't look too long when I shop online. I read the blurb and go straight to the sample chapters. Love your plain Green on Black Liaden bundle covers btw.

[kk1raven.livejournal.com]

1. I don't expect covers to be accurate about anything beyond the author's name and title because past experience tells me they often aren't accurate.

2. I would describe my feeling about inaccuracies in these things to be more mild annoyance than upset. The exception to that is when the cover choices seem to be rooted in prejudice. Then I really do get upset.

3. I get most upset if I feel deceived about the kind of story.

4. Contacting whoever is responsible for the choice of covers. For a few of the books that a buy that would be the author but usually it would be the publisher. Some of the self-published books I've bought have had rather bad covers but I don't think I have any that have misleading covers. Boycotting the author makes utterly no sense to me and for the most part neither does boycotting the publisher. Boycotting the publisher generally hurts the authors and that isn't something I want to do.

5. Inaccurate covers are more likely to prevent me from buying a book than to mislead me into buying a book I end up not liking. If the cover is such that I think the book isn't going to be something I'll be interested in I'm not necessarily going to look any further unless I'm familiar with the author.

[muirecan.livejournal.com]

No I don't expect a cover and a book to have any relationship. I simply hope that they do. I remember they abstract psychedelic covers of the 60's. :p

The better a cover matches what I will find inside the book the happier I am with the artist and publisher. Note I don't mention author unless the book is an indie book and the author picked the cover.

What I do want is for the cover to give me an idea of what is inside the book. If its a scene accurately depicted from the book or what you might expect to find in the book then good. As you move away from that I become less happy with the cover.

But really the cover and title are things to get me to pick up the book or click the link about the book and find out more. Either by browsing the book in the store or looking at details about it online.

[implume.livejournal.com]

Different genera have their own cover conventions. Long ago, even before bodice rippers, someone told me there had been a revolution in Gothic covers.

Old style showed a beautiful girl in a long dress on a windswept moor. Behind her was an ominous mansion dominated by a tower.

New style showed a beautiful girl in a long dress on a windswept moor. Behind her was an ominous mansion dominated by a tower. The tower window had a light in it.

Cover art is cover art and outside the writer’s control.

If I eat an excellent meal at a restaurant, should I scorn the cook because I dislike the décor? It’s the food that matters.

In other words, you can’t judge a book by its cover.

The solution is simple. Go old school.

Time was the editor of Weird Wonder Anecdotes Magazine would send a favored writer a magazine cover. “Write a story about that.”

As long as the author can write to the cover, there is no problem.

[ash-marten.livejournal.com]

I rarely buy books based on the cover art -- I go by author, blurb content, and first chapter or other excerpt. I do expect that the artwork reflects the tone/focus of the novel, even if it's not accurate in the particulars. Cover art can send me running from a book if it's excessively gaudy, curlified, involves awful colors, or shows people more scantily-clad than I'm prepared to associate with that day. Same with ridiculous poses and headless people. If it's an author whose other works I know and like, I'll just scoff and move on to the important part (the text), but if it's an unknown author and I'm already on the fence about the content, artwork can be the thing that makes me backpedal. Once I'm into the book, the cover art becomes pretty immaterial to me.

[lornastutz.livejournal.com]

After I've found authors I really enjoyed (Lee & Miller, et al) I'd just buy the books.
But when stores use to shelve books so one could see a cover. it was the cover that caused me to pick the book up to read the blurb and the first chapter.
Now, with ebooks it's the blurb that draws me in.
So I guess my answer is it's a nice idea but not entirely necessary.

Cranky Author

[nocal-kathyf.livejournal.com]

I do expect some connection to the book and the cover. I don't get upset about "bad" covers unless there is a huge discrepancy such as showing a simpering blonde "heroine" when the protagonist is a capable brunette. I don't buy bodice ripper covers, ever.
I have appreciated hearing how you have established a relationship with David Mattingly, and I love his inclusion of cats in the illustrations. It is an extra tie to you and yours, although not done for that purpose.
I usually buy a book based on the author, not the cover, but if I like a cover artist (illustrator) I may pick up other work they have done and am usually happy with it. Tanith Lee comes to mind. I would like the artists would WANT to have as much information as possible about the scene at least they are to represent. It would be good to ask them as well. I would write the publisher if I felt the story had been compromised by the cover, and perhaps to the author(s) to commiserate. Kathy

[kay-gmd.livejournal.com]

I only found it really obnoxious when it's really blatant. Like when the Tarabotti novels that are about a woman who loves eating, and has the curves one would expect from that, and carries a particular parasol. The woman on the cover has the parasol, and a pencil waistline. If it was a part of the story that the main character was a particular race, and the cover art was supposed to be that character I would find it obnoxious if the character was represented as a different race.

I haven't done anything to express my upset. I certainly wouldn't blame the author unless the author had expressed that they really thought the cover was perfect.

Covers

[charlie russel (from livejournal.com)]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?
I've been reading SF since the covers were appealing directly to my adolescent testosterone. In those many years, very few accurately reflected the actual content until maybe the last 15? And even now, hardly the majority. So no, I don't expect much and I'm not often disappointed.

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:
2a. The main character - yes, at least minimally.
2b. The setting - not particularly
2c. The kind of story inside the covers. Yes.

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most? Why?
2c, since the cover is part of what "sells" the book to me if it's a new author. So a highly inaccurate cover is a cheat.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?
4a. By writing to the author -- yeah, right, like the authors suddenly became the power in this industry.
4b. By writing to the publisher. Possibly, but I seriously doubt they listen. Since they don't actually have to.
4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers. No. I wouldn't have much left to read.
4d. Nothing will change, so why try? Close. But perhaps by making a lot of noise about really egregious examples we can at least have some impact?

5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me! Good covers are appealing and can sell books. So I'm NOT in favour of going to the sort of cheap covers that a lot of self-published books are using. But I do wish that authors would get at least some input into the process. I also thinks that, as readers, we should applaud those that are realistic representations of the internal content of the book and that the quality/accuracy of the cover should be one consideration in the purchase.

[quotidian-c.livejournal.com]

I'm not very visual, so it has to be pretty blatantly wrong before I would notice. I would like cover art to reflect the novel, whether by accurately representing characters or setting, or by setting the right tone, but I'm not shocked if it doesn't.

I guess if I had bought a book based primarily on the cover then I would be most upset by misrepresentation of the type of story. But I mostly buy books I've seen recommended elsewhere - a cover may help me decide which book on my long to-read list I buy, or it may put me off buying a book, but it's unlikely to be my first source on story type.

I do follow discussions on whitewashing covers, unrealistic cover poses and similar cover issues. I have actively bought books that had do have PoC on the cover.

I know author's don't usually have a lot of influence on covers. It wouldn't occur to me to write to the publisher if I don't like a cover. I'm unlikely to boycott an author or a publisher, but if a cover is particularly bad I might choose not to buy that book, or more likely, if it's moderately bad and the author isn't on my must read list, it will take me longer to buy the book and I may never get around to it.

The Liaden covers fall into the like-but-don't-love category for me. Which is pretty good on the overall scale; I love very few covers.

book covers that sell books accurately are are treasure

[joythree.livejournal.com]

I enjoy book covers that accurately depict the content of a book. I went into my library and looking at my many books, I buy everything by my favorite authors regardless of cover art, and I seem to buy the hardcovers when the art work is very germane.

C J Cherryh has been blessed with awesome covers.
Your Carousel covers wonderfully depict the FEELING of your stories.

I don't/won't complain because I if I love a cover, I buy the book. If the artwork is true to the plot and I love it, I buy the print of the cover at a Convention. If I get hooked on an artist, I buy books of their collected works. My very favorite (signed) print is Michael Whelan's cover for _Chanur's Homecoming_.

No, I would never punish the author for a book cover ---knowingly. If the cover of a science fiction story is of a hot and steamy couple, I won't even look at the blurb on the back. If I had ever seen Mr. Hickman's _Agent of Change_ cover, I would have snapped it up immediately, and I would have thus discovered you two back in 1988! In perusing my cover artists, I find I possess several of Steven Hickman's covers: thanks for bringing him to my attention.

the author has questions about covers

[catherine ives (from livejournal.com)]

I am so not artistic I usually don't feel qualified to judge cover art. I did think that the cover of "Necessity's Child" had a good cover, I was able to more or less identify the scene in the novel that the cover comes from. I have an impression that the cover art of Lee and Miller novels has improved over the years.

I am a great fan of first sentences in novels. The greatest of all probably the first sentence of Don Quixote and the second the first sentence of Pride and Prejudice. then after that I can pretty well tell whether I will be able to read a book by about the end of the first page. I saw the first page of a book recently, can't remember which one, and was very sure that I wasn't going to be able to read it. The prose was in short staccato style with hyphens. I guess it was supposed to be mod ren or something.

I like Charlie Russell's photo of his doggie with shades. Very nice.
C.

Cover Art etc.

[catherine ives (from livejournal.com)]

I just went and looked at the very fat paperback "Partners in Necessity" that contains various novels including "Agent of Change". The cover art is nice. It shows portraits of the major characters. But I've never liked the portrait of Miri. It is of what I see as a much older women. Remembering that Miri was very young when she teamed up with Van Con. I see her as having freckles to go along with her red hair. I guess the freckles would be from her father's side of the family.

Also "Agent of Change" - as I've said before - has one of the best first lines ever. "The man who was not Terrence O'Grady had come quietly,"

Yes...

[gareth griffiths (from livejournal.com)]

1. Do you, as a reader, expect that cover art will accurately reflect the accompanying novel?

YES

2. Do you become upset when/if it turns out that the cover does not accurately represent:

2a. The main character
Yes if the cover was clearly the main character. Having the cover show other characters or scenes typical of the book is fine. Clearly wrong characters is a problem.

2b. The setting
Yes if it doesn't 'feel' like the story

2c. The kind of story inside the covers
YES more so that the a or b.

3. In 2, above -- which misrepresentation bothers you the most?
C
Why?
Because if the cover conveys the style/feel of the book wrongly I feel cheated as much as a jar labelled plum jam that contains strawberry. I might like the jam but I'll think twice about buying that brand again.

4. If you are upset about inaccurate covers, how do you think change can be effected?
By publishers starting to realise that better covers sell more...

4a. By writing to the author
Probably should but don't

4b. By writing to the publisher
Probably should but don't

4c. By boycotting authors and publishers who publish inaccurate covers
To a degree I do that. I will be much less inclined to try a story after a bad experience - I suspect I tarnish the author more than the publisher although there is an element of sameness about some publisher's house style which probably influences me a bit.
That said even though upset, if the story is good enough I'll go for the author again - 95% the words are what matters.

4d. Nothing will change, so why try?

5. Other thoughts on the topic? Tell me!
The covers should indicate the genre/style/feel. They will be (part of) what makes me pick up a book by an author I don't know - then I'll probably see the cover quotes (are there plugs by other authors I respect). I came to Korval not because I saw the covers but because I saw that another author I really like commented on how she liked them and that spurred me to investigate - the rest is history as they say. (Comments by Elizabeth Moon and others on her blog since you asked).

Another kind of cover art

[rnjtolch.livejournal.com]

Back in the 1970's (or was it the '60's--my memory is a bit hazy) there were a lot of SF books published with covers that had abstract designs or non-representational artwork. Avon was one such publisher. If anyone has an old Avon copy of one of James Blish's Cities in Flight novels go look at the cover. For my taste those were more interesting than any artwork that is supposed to depict a scene or the people in the book, but just plain does not.

The Theo books are a great example of really good character and scene representation. So was the cover on the last Bujold Vorkoverse book, which was lewdly wonderful. The covers on your Ace paperbacks were pretty darn good and the faces were pretty on point, but the Del Rey was not. I won't even mention the off-putting Baen compendiums.

There is another way to look at it: you got paid. I hope so anyway.