That's this week's topic from Rainy Day Ramblings for Tell Me Something Tuesday, and I am going to dive right in.
Mass market paperbacks with movie covers. Although I support any and all things that encourage people to read (I really do), I really hate these versions of books most of the time. I feel like the movie adaptation on its own should entice people to read the book and the movie cover is just one more way it feels like they are trying to get extra money. These covers are usually poorly done, as well as the book is on cheap quality paper with below par binding.
Do I hate mass market paperbacks? No, I think they serve their purpose and I love that it makes books more accessible to people who want to own a copy or don't want to suffer through the long wait list at the library without paying a fortune. However we are kidding ourselves if we think the physical book is a good quality. So, combining that with a cheesy-looking movie cover can really put me off of a book.
I'm not really a huge fan of movie covers in the first place, however there are a few exceptions that I don't mind so much. I still prefer the original or non-media covers, but they don't irritate me quite as much. Perhaps that's hypocritical, but ah well...
-----
The So-and-so's Daughter/Son title. How many times have I seen this? I don't dislike the title on its own, I actually like them, however it's been so overused now that I am extremely sick of it. I mean, why do we need to define someone based on their parents every time? Especially when a lot of these books don't really have anything to do with the protagonist's parents or being defined by them. It just doesn't make any logical sense, and it doesn't work.
If the characters think that the protagonist can't accomplish what they want to and/or have misconceptions about them because of where they came from/their parents' profession, then I completely see this working, but otherwise this title is a big no-no from me now.
-----
The cover is wrong. I stole this from Rainy Day Ramblings' list because I didn't think of it automatically myself, but it actually drives me nuts. If the character is described as a brunette female with curly hair and freckles, I don't want a Reese Witherspoon look-alike on the cover. I'm not saying I'm going to scream at you if a painting is used that is not a thousand percent accurate down to the last eyelash, but sometimes I don't think they even try. I've detailed this a little bit in the past here.
It's one thing as well if just a standard painting is used to depict something on the cover, but these inaccuracies are much, much worse to me when the artwork was commissioned for this specific book. It's often quite clear that they never read the book and it usually seems like they got a description from the publisher like "it's a goblin with big fangs" rather than being able to read the descriptive passages to learn that they also are blue and have pig noses. Trying to determine what character or creature is meant to be depicted on the cover can sometimes be quite the adventure!
-------------------------
Rant over! What are some things that bother you in the book market?
I totally forgot about the movie tie in... Total gimmick to sell more books. I usually prefer the original covers. I guess I haven’t seen as many books with the daughter or son in the title, but now that you mention it, they do stick out. Not as bad as the Girl titles. Anyway, some great points. Thanks for weighing in and being a part of TMST.
ReplyDeleteI'm one of those people who wishes they wouldn't change the covers of books from their originals unless there is an important reason. I mean, sometimes the newer covers look better, but I sort of like that the first cover IS the book cover.
DeleteRoberta, I accidentally deleted your comment, so I am re-posting it here:
ReplyDeleteQuote: "why do we need to define someone based on their parents every time? Especially when a lot of these books don't really have anything to do with the protagonist's parents or being defined by them."
Ha! There are lots of "girls" in the titles, but you're right - lots of "children" (whether male or female - especially female) as well. And to the best of my knowledge, usually their parents aren't even in sight (as it often is with YA).
I'm very much cover-blind, but I understand your frustration. It's like the book is only there for consumption and it isn't an object of art...wait, is that what it is? just a PRODUCT? sorry, I was wrong then...
No idea what publishers are thinking sometimes...
DeleteHaha, I did the same once. For some reason, I'm always near to deleting comments I have just approved when I'm only trying to reply to them LOL.
DeleteIt's like "no, I REALLY want your comments, I promise!"
DeleteI totally agrees with all of these... We all know the book is always better than the movie as well ;)
ReplyDeleteRight? Read the book because the book is the best, not because it's a movie!
Delete