More musings on cover art

[Albertosaurus Rex]

Gollancz's Fantasy Masterworks and Paizo's Planet Stories lines are both efforts to bring older fantasy books back into print. What I find interesting is that both publishers make use of strikingly different kinds of cover art.

Fantasy Masterworks tries to give the books some sense of class, in many cases using pre-existing classical paintings as cover art. Planet Stories, on the other hand, embraces a pulpy sense of adventure. Surprisingly, there is little direct overlap between titles, but this one is pretty nice:

[Image: selg.jpg]

I don't know if this is a pre-existing painting, but it is beautiful. Abandoned ruins, presumably somewhere on Mars. This might be a tale of wonder, exploration and loneliness. But did you know that this story has also been printed under another title? And that's where Planet Stories comes in:

[Image: PZO8020_500.jpeg]

Bam! Half naked warriors versus warrior chicks in form-fitting armor! There's rip-roaring action to be had! I haven't read this book, so I don't know which image is more appropriate, but it's an interesting contrast.

What kind of cover would you go for? While I personally like how classy the Fantasy Masterworks look, the Planet Stories covers are just more attention-grabbing, and have two simultaneous effects on me:

1. "I don't want to be spotted with a book that looks like that!"
2. "I need to read this book!"

['thul]

These beings are generally opposed to ridiculous armor like that chain mail & plate swimsuit, so there is no doubt they prefer the top one.

[redchild]

Is that a marshmallow angel of death?

I have noticed a lot more action-centered sci-fi/fantasy book covers lately. A lot of the time, photography and cgi is used instead of paintings but when there are paintings, they usually end up looking more like RPG video game concept art.

Of course they do succeed in catching your attention. A quiet, mysterious setting depicted in the first image is not as eye catching as the second. Marketing comes before art in most cases.

But you could also argue that paintings like these are the "pulp" covers of our age-- most of them being digitally painted and depicting cliched, sensational sci-fi/fantasy imagery instead of contemporary settings. Not to say pulp cover-like illustrations are bad, though, as works done by artists like Frazetta or Alex Ross can be both striking and appealing.

[Albertosaurus Rex]

Alright, time for another comparison. Warning to those with slow connections: lots more pictures coming up!

Today we're going to look at the works of C. L. Moore. This collection by Fantasy Masterworks collects the short stories about Moore's two most famous creations: Jirel of Joiry and Northwest Smith. (Yes, his name is Northwest. Must have had rather eccentric parents.)

[Image: bglg.jpg]

Yeah, that's the Medusa of Greek mythology. Having read the Northwest Smith stories, I can say that this image fits the first story, in which Smith meets an Medusa-like alien (Whose species is in fact implied to have inspired the Medusa of Greek mythology). I haven't yet read the Jirel stories yet, so I don't know if anything of the sort appears in those stories.

Planet Stories has published the tales of these characters in seperate volumes. (So why bother with that edition? Because the FM edition doesn't have all the stories, and the PS edition does.)

[Image: PZO8004_180.jpeg]

That's Jirel of Joiry in a swimsuit armor. (Thanks for coining that lovely phrase, Thul. Chainmail bikini doesn't quite fit because this armor covers slightly more than a bikini.) In the stories, she supposedly dresses a little more sensibly.

[Image: PZO8007_180.jpeg]

And that's Northwest Smith, with another cover that references the Medusa story. (That woman behind him - that's her.) To be honest, none of these covers really appeal to me. An ugly severed head or a bland shot of our hero? I'm curious what you guys think.

In closing, two more covers:

[Image: PZO8016_180.jpeg]

This is the cover that most of all has me simultaneously going "Atrocious!" and "Awesome!" I so want to know what goes on between these covers...

[Image: PZO8014_180.jpeg]

And this PS cover actually has some class. Exploring an alien world, from the looks of it. Nice.

['thul]

these beings at first thought of using "chainmail bikini", but they noticed, like you, that it did not fit.

[joost]

The covers for Manda Scott's Boudica series:
[Image: 7d1e112447dreamingtheeagle.jpg]
Dreaming the eagle (part 1)
[Image: 827748b316dreamingthehound.jpg]
Dreaming the hound (part 3)

I like those covers. They're simple and beautiful (although Part 1 has a rather funny looking eagle )

And now she has a new series, about Rome:
[Image: 51NAwZQQkXL._SS500_.jpg]
The emperor's spy (Part 1)

Bwech.

[Farseer]

Great discussion!

Interesting that title changes also sometimes occur with the change of cover art eg I must admit that I would choose 'The Sword of Rhiannon' any day over 'Sea-Kings of Mars etc' simply by virtue of the title.

Having never overly bothered about cover art before (I'd always pick up a dust jacket-less hardcover before something like this), you do know that I will henceforth just HAVE to make a thorough and critical analysis of the cover art of every book that I ever consider purchasing...!

Medusa books - I'd have to go with the Planet Series works. I don't overly like the artwork but I like it better than the Fantasy Masterworks attempt.

Boudica vs Rome - I'd have to agree with joost in that I'd prefer the Boudica covers.

The Sword of Rhiannon - That's definitely a marshmallow angel of death, redchild!

[redchild]

While I like the art deco direction of the 35th edition of Atlas Shrugged, I nevertheless find it a bit bland. Almost a great cover.
[Image: atlas_shrugged.jpg]

I much prefer the first edition, which I believe was painted by Rand's husband, Frank O'Conner:
[Image: 215-2.jpg]

And why have I never seen these?! The Finnish hardcover edition of GRRM's Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings:
[Image: EUh4X.jpg]
[Image: V7GcCl.jpg]

Old. School. It looks like something you would see in the old fairy tale books made at the turn of the 20th century. Moral of the story: never underestimate the power of duotone.

The US covers aren't terrible, but neither are they very memorable. Generic, but safe. I've seen a few of the newer editions coming out which basically followed the same idea.

Not an outstanding cover but I liked the approach. It "re-designed" a very well known photograph by skillfully cropping it into a bold composition. The corner of the reflecting pool becomes a symbol-- of progress or divisiveness?
[Image: 15721.jpg]

[Albertosaurus Rex]

I'll admit that I'm not quite sure what to make of that last cover. And those GRRM covers... they're quite nice, but it does really suit the grim and gritty tale within?

[redchild]

I'll admit that I'm not quite sure what to make of that last cover. And those GRRM covers... they're quite nice, but it does really suit the grim and gritty tale within?

Yes it does give off an entirely different "feel." Much more like a classic fairy tale than an accurate representation of the story so in this case it could be misleading to a first time reader. They do lend an air of "timelessness," though, which I think can also be appreciated. On the other hand, many book covers don't convey what the book is about anyway.

In this case the generic, emblematic covers can be a strength as while they do not convey the grittiness of the story, neither do they promise you anything nor cater to any expectations. So you pretty much dive in blindly with very few preconceptions.