Let's talk covers

I've made comments here on occasion regarding the appropriate nature of the cover art for Voices of Vision: Creators of Science Fiction and Fantasy Speak. The good people at Nebraska have taken note of these comments, and done some google searching and such in order to, apparently, find out more. To their credit, they haven't called me up and cursed me out for my criticism, vague though it may be. Since there isn't much public commentary available, I think it appropriate at this juncture to express here what my informal research (and personal opinion) have turned up regarding the cover. I want to clarify that I'm not making these pronouncements wholly in a vacuum--I've got a good deal of layout and design work to my credit, and while I don't claim the talent necessary to make a living at it, I do have the background that allows for reasoned criticism and evaluation.

Firstly, it's not a bad cover. I want to make that abundantly clear. It is very striking, and grabs a potential book-buyer's attention, which is what book covers are supposed to do. But I don't think it's an appropriate cover for my book. Early on in his Sandman run, Neil Gaiman introduced a nightmare called the Corinthian with mouths for eyes. It was a nightmarish image (appropriately enough) in an unabashed horror storyline. I know what the designer was going for with the graphic--conflating "voice" and "vision" led him to replace the eyes with mouths, to visually represent the title. I've got no problem with that. But the sum of the parts still promises "horror," and that's something of a false promise where this book is concerned. Were this an interview collection featuring Dean Koontz and Stephen King, no problem. But screaming eyeballs just don't seem to mesh with Samuel Delany and Jack Williamson.

I've solicited opinions from members of the Slugtribe and Tryptophan writers' workshops in Austin, professional science fiction writers who've been around the block and understand covers and the publishing process. The verdict was 50/50. Half of the respondants--mostly women, interestingly enough--were outright repulsed by the cover and would actively avoid buying the book. Coincidentally, my daughters and wife also dislike the cover, because it's "too creepy." The other half--mostly men--found it striking and eye-catching. They felt it a good cover, inasmuch as it will likely catch potential readers' attention in bookstores, which jibes with my thoughts on the matter. Maybe half of those who liked the cover concept also thought it not an accurate representation of the book, but that the benefits of the cover outweighed the negatives.

At ConDFW I spoke with Rick Klaw--who's been a book buyer for years for Adventures In Crime & Space, BookPeople and Half Price Books--and is adamant about what makes a good book cover (from a bookseller's perspective) versus a bad cover. He's done panels on this very topic. Voices of Vision stumped him. He couldn't tell me if he thought it a good cover or not, because of the conflicting positives and negatives. Which I found very interesting, because Rick, although a friend, has never minced words with me before. The one thing we do agree on is that John Picacio, a fantastic San Antonio artist I've known for years, would've done an unambiguously phenomenal cover. I lobbied hard with Nebraska to use him, but the reality is that very few authors have any influence over their cover art or book design. I am no exception to this rule.

In any event, as I've said before, I think it's a stronger cover than other books in the Bison Frontiers of the Imagination Series have. It's not fair for me to toss out blind criticism without clarifying my opinions, so later on--after I've uploaded some example images so as not to steal their bandwidth--I'll discuss how I think those other covers are great examples of a number of good ideas that, when combined, the whole is somewhat less than the sum of its parts.

Now Playing: The Benedictine Monks of Santo Domingo De Silos Chant