Do you judge a book by its cover?

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Do you judge a book by its cover?

I frequently do! Not so much in the case of cheap reprints (e.g. those yellow Gollancz sci-fi jobbies), but a well-designed cover, I find, is very indicative of the style/content of the book. Particularly in the case of Robert Rankin, who actually creates sculptures (e.g. the "Voodoo Handbag from "Dance of the¦), photographs of which are used as book covers.

Anyone any views on this?

~PEPS~

Yes. Minimilism never held any appeal for me. I remember the Kurt Vonnegut ones, especially Deadeye with its garish jumper yellow or for that matter Updike's recent covers which are an experiment with the sensibilities. I hated both.
Enzo v2.0
Anonymous's picture
I agree rdeous, although I would say that for me any of Vonnegut's covers could've been award-winning, and they would still pale next to the quality of the writing itself. The man's a genius.
I'm afraid I have been guilty of judging a book by its cover, in fact the topic crept up on the way to Fish's on Saturday when I said that I had not bothered to read Catch 22 for uni as my copy has a picture of a gun on the front, I now feel suitably ashamed and shall endeavor to read it before I start work in September.
Enzo v2.0
Anonymous's picture
In my opinion, don't bother. I tried to read it when I was young, and didn't get anywhere. A couple of months ago, I tried again, got overexcited about how great it was, and then got bored less than halfway through. One day, i may try again, but frankly, I'm not too fussed. On the subject of covers, I hate those penguin books - the silver ones. Horrible, horrible off-putting things. The content is usually good though: typeface; often well-presented introductions, etc...but the covers...eugggh.
Back in the 80's, when I was a big Koontz fan, a series of re-prints came out which all had pictures of naked ladies in various reclining states on the cover (anyone remember these?). As I was already a fan, I was thankfully not put off by these. However, what if I was a seeker of porn? How dissappointed I would've been! ~PEPS~ “There is no spoon.”

The All New Pepsoid the Second!

Judging the entrails assumes importance when you've got a series lined up in front of you; those fourth grade biblical nancy drews and hardy boys, or enid blytons for that matter. I always liked the adventures of the wishing chair over Mr. Muddle, though his covers took the cake. But nobody really cares if catcher in the rye or a Faulkner is depressingly presented.
Judging a book by its cover is like judging a cat by its miaoooooooo.
Is that not reasonable? ~PEPS~ “There is no spoon.”

The All New Pepsoid the Second!

Yes it is very reasonable unless the cat has laryngitis. Personally I like books with huge depictions of genitalia or trees on the front. That way I know what I'm getting.
luv that genitalia. That's what got me into reading in the first place - finding some mags under me dad's bed with big hairy cracks on the front page. Best thing that coulda happened to me (at 12). It aint law if it aint laminated!

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Hey, maybe that's the way to increase literacy levels in schools. Put cocks and fannies on the front of the textbooks. Perhaps that's what "Chicken Licken" is about after all.
I don't see a problem with that theory. It aint law if it aint laminated!

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

I don't think Madeley'n'Finnegan would approve. ~PEPS~ “There is no spoon.”

The All New Pepsoid the Second!

Richard and Judy! Manus hoec inimica tyrannis.
Oy! Less o' the Latin, you! What's that... "Man imitating Tyrannosaurus" or something...?? ~PEPS~ “There is no spoon.”

The All New Pepsoid the Second!

Topic locked