Off the bat, it should be noted that the digital reproduction of this cover doesn’t do it justice for the simple fact that the colors are off. In the store, the orange is vibrant and its contrast with the blue really resonates.
That aside, this still works on a variety of levels. The novel relates the story of a cult which deals with sexuality, cloning, suicide and creepiness, so the various organic negative spaces, repeating elements and general other-worldliness is justified as such.
Even though the imagery may work conceptually, it’s seriously lacking in function. The title is completely lost in favor of putting “a novel” dead-center in this creepy image. If this were intentional, it’s not working.
This is mind blowing and the white negative space making the eye and with “A Novel” dead center is a bit subversive. Looking at this is invokes paranoid kaleidoscope.
agreed, way better than the hardcover. i own it, and always had to avert my eyes to that disappointment. esp. since this is really such a fantastic book. so much so, that, even though i like this cover, i’m tempted to just go off on what a genius houllebecq is. but, sticking to book design, i’d say this isn’t quite as successful as the john gall/michel houllebecq combo on ‘platform.’ there’s a cover. there’s a book. nothing beats a great designer and a great writer matched up.
If not for the context of the book, I wouldn’t be into this at all. With that said, it’s a decent cover I suppose. I don’t enjoy the placement of the pull quote as it is the only non-symmetrical element on the cover.
Looks like someone tried to combine elements of the Oryx and Crake hard and soft covers. What with the reflective image, the large circle, quote placement, text treatment… Perhaps this cover would look better in person, I’m not sure, but I really don’t care for it here.
The goofy “eye” in the center just clashes with the prominent photograph. This cover is heavy on the graphics and heavy on the photography… you shouldn’t be heavy on either, and certainly not at the same time, IMO. Where covers like Oryx and Crake excel is at a balance between classic, tactile art (such as a painting, or photography) and modern graphic computer design. Too many modern ideas smooshed together here… it’s an overload on my eyes.
P.S. I just now saw who the designer is and I don’t believe John deisgned this (which is incredibly ironic, because he designed Oryx and Crake). Maybe he was having an off day… we all do.
Contextually relevant or not, this cover doesn’t work. The eye really is goofy and puts far too much emphasis on the sell line and the (completely pointless) A Novel. This is something I’d expect from a first year student working with an image too low in resolution to fill the space.
what’s up with the slightly “off” placement of text (particularly in ‘a novel’ and the author’s name)? it’s subtle enough that it looks like a mistake. i’m curious if it was or not.
Very cool. Very arresting and disconcerting to look at. Cyclops effect that goes a long way on the shelf. The circles and what not are very Jon Gall if I can be so bold as to say I noticed… Obviously the man cannot be locked to a style…
C-dog, I understand you are still a student and really don’t have any understanding of the intricacies of a publishing house. First off, the quality of this cover aside (I find it quite beautiful) there is a web of approvals and input a cover goes through before, during and after you design it. (which is why I am generally opposed to negative posts about covers on here) The publisher, the author, the editor, sales, barnes and noble, and sometimes the authors family all have a say about a cover before it gets published.
Some of the comments we get?
I don’t like this color, find a new image, if you make it lighter we will buy 5,00 more copies, make it look “big book”, make it “hip and edgy”, too dark, too light, use an illustration, use a photograph, type is too small etc etc.
In the end, we are in the business of selling books and not just making pretty pictures. Making compromises is a daily chore and rarely does something go through that is exactly as you envisioned from the beginning.
I don’t think C-dog is oblivious to the gruel of the publishing world. I think this blog is both about the cover as an evolutionary piece of art as well as the end result. Bringing to light what makes a cover attractive or unattractive for any given individual is not a matter of fact or process in as much as taste. C-dog does not like this cover. it does not float his boat. His observations are valid.
One thing that all this does tell us is that even a really accomplished designer like Gall (art director) has little say about certain marketing issues and in the end he too must go through the same pisser of a process as an entry level designer. Kind of puts us all in the same boat… Which feels good.
A few of my favorite client comments: (after I ask for any ideas they might have and they say no) Wow, this is completely not what I imagined or expected!. (after sourcing an image) Can we make the head look up and the arm cross the chest (which arm??!?!?!?!?!#?#$?x%x*?). We really want the title (and that god-forsaken titanic of a subtitle) to fill up most of the cover—but we like the size of the image…
I’d like to point out that the negative spaces in there form little islands of emptiness… thats the first read I got. I'm surprised nobody else has pointed that out. The red dot reinforces it.
What’s this site for, good covers that will sell, or good covers that are good design? It’s entirely possible everyone in the ‘web of approvals’ has poor design taste, for all their insight on what will sell.
I realize you are no longer a student and perhaps the jagged edges of the real world have taken their toll on your willingness to just lighten up, but get bent. Why so serious?
C-Dog, I wasn’t trying to in any way trying to put you down, just make you aware of the many things that go into these covers. Negative criticism is fine as long as it is constructive. Silly, snoooze fest, boring, goofy arn’t very constructive. In other words, you don’t have to be nice, just be respectful.
Off the bat, it should be noted that the digital reproduction of this cover doesn’t do it justice for the simple fact that the colors are off. In the store, the orange is vibrant and its contrast with the blue really resonates.
That aside, this still works on a variety of levels. The novel relates the story of a cult which deals with sexuality, cloning, suicide and creepiness, so the various organic negative spaces, repeating elements and general other-worldliness is justified as such.
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-04-21 11:10:00
Even though the imagery may work conceptually, it’s seriously lacking in function. The title is completely lost in favor of putting “a novel” dead-center in this creepy image. If this were intentional, it’s not working.
— Beth, 2008-04-21 11:54:00
This is mind blowing and the white negative space making the eye and with “A Novel” dead center is a bit subversive. Looking at this is invokes paranoid kaleidoscope.
— jW, 2008-04-21 14:01:00
i dont get it….
— con, 2008-04-21 17:59:00
Far, far better than the hardcover.
http://www.amazon.com/Possibility-Island-Michel-Houellebecq/dp/0307263495
— GH, 2008-04-21 19:29:00
agreed, way better than the hardcover. i own it, and always had to avert my eyes to that disappointment. esp. since this is really such a fantastic book. so much so, that, even though i like this cover, i’m tempted to just go off on what a genius houllebecq is. but, sticking to book design, i’d say this isn’t quite as successful as the john gall/michel houllebecq combo on ‘platform.’ there’s a cover. there’s a book. nothing beats a great designer and a great writer matched up.
— zach, 2008-04-21 21:40:00
I want someone to write a poem that rhymes ‘Houellebecq’ with ‘Weetabix’.
— dca, 2008-04-22 06:44:00
If not for the context of the book, I wouldn’t be into this at all. With that said, it’s a decent cover I suppose. I don’t enjoy the placement of the pull quote as it is the only non-symmetrical element on the cover.
m welch
— m welch, 2008-04-22 08:38:00
Looks like someone tried to combine elements of the Oryx and Crake hard and soft covers. What with the reflective image, the large circle, quote placement, text treatment… Perhaps this cover would look better in person, I’m not sure, but I really don’t care for it here.
The goofy “eye” in the center just clashes with the prominent photograph. This cover is heavy on the graphics and heavy on the photography… you shouldn’t be heavy on either, and certainly not at the same time, IMO. Where covers like Oryx and Crake excel is at a balance between classic, tactile art (such as a painting, or photography) and modern graphic computer design. Too many modern ideas smooshed together here… it’s an overload on my eyes.
— C-Dog, 2008-04-22 08:39:00
P.S. I just now saw who the designer is and I don’t believe John deisgned this (which is incredibly ironic, because he designed Oryx and Crake). Maybe he was having an off day… we all do.
— C-Dog, 2008-04-22 08:41:00
Contextually relevant or not, this cover doesn’t work. The eye really is goofy and puts far too much emphasis on the sell line and the (completely pointless) A Novel. This is something I’d expect from a first year student working with an image too low in resolution to fill the space.
— rek, 2008-04-22 09:44:00
what’s up with the slightly “off” placement of text (particularly in ‘a novel’ and the author’s name)? it’s subtle enough that it looks like a mistake. i’m curious if it was or not.
— jac, 2008-04-22 09:52:00
Very cool. Very arresting and disconcerting to look at. Cyclops effect that goes a long way on the shelf. The circles and what not are very Jon Gall if I can be so bold as to say I noticed… Obviously the man cannot be locked to a style…
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-04-22 16:52:00
c-dog—all your comments aside, I gotta say the only real eye sore is the stupid sales quote crossing so closely to the “eye” in the middle.
They should have just put the quote on the spine… Now there’s an idea.
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-04-22 16:54:00
C-dog, I understand you are still a student and really don’t have any understanding of the intricacies of a publishing house. First off, the quality of this cover aside (I find it quite beautiful) there is a web of approvals and input a cover goes through before, during and after you design it. (which is why I am generally opposed to negative posts about covers on here) The publisher, the author, the editor, sales, barnes and noble, and sometimes the authors family all have a say about a cover before it gets published.
Some of the comments we get?
I don’t like this color, find a new image, if you make it lighter we will buy 5,00 more copies, make it look “big book”, make it “hip and edgy”, too dark, too light, use an illustration, use a photograph, type is too small etc etc.
In the end, we are in the business of selling books and not just making pretty pictures. Making compromises is a daily chore and rarely does something go through that is exactly as you envisioned from the beginning.
Just some food for thought.
— Gregg Kulick, 2008-04-23 12:08:00
Make the logo bigger!
I don’t think C-dog is oblivious to the gruel of the publishing world. I think this blog is both about the cover as an evolutionary piece of art as well as the end result. Bringing to light what makes a cover attractive or unattractive for any given individual is not a matter of fact or process in as much as taste. C-dog does not like this cover. it does not float his boat. His observations are valid.
One thing that all this does tell us is that even a really accomplished designer like Gall (art director) has little say about certain marketing issues and in the end he too must go through the same pisser of a process as an entry level designer. Kind of puts us all in the same boat… Which feels good.
A few of my favorite client comments: (after I ask for any ideas they might have and they say no) Wow, this is completely not what I imagined or expected!. (after sourcing an image) Can we make the head look up and the arm cross the chest (which arm??!?!?!?!?!#?#$?x%x*?). We really want the title (and that god-forsaken titanic of a subtitle) to fill up most of the cover—but we like the size of the image…
and so the saga continues…
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-04-23 16:30:00
I’d like to point out that the negative spaces in there form little islands of emptiness… thats the first read I got. I'm surprised nobody else has pointed that out. The red dot reinforces it.
— Chris Papasadero / Fwis, 2008-04-23 22:52:00
I don’t like it, I find the composition lacking originality and the only good thing about it is the two colours…
— Adrianna. L, 2008-04-24 03:29:00
What’s this site for, good covers that will sell, or good covers that are good design? It’s entirely possible everyone in the ‘web of approvals’ has poor design taste, for all their insight on what will sell.
— rek, 2008-04-24 11:37:00
Is it good design if it doesn’t sell?
— GK, 2008-04-24 15:26:00
I really have no room to say this (I am a huge fan of Mr. Gall’s work) but JG I have seen better.
— Arthur, 2008-04-25 05:31:00
NEXT COVER! I NEED MY BOOK-COVER FIX!!!!
— NOW, 2008-04-29 06:42:00
Gregg Kulick:
I realize you are no longer a student and perhaps the jagged edges of the real world have taken their toll on your willingness to just lighten up, but get bent. Why so serious?
— C-Dog, 2008-04-29 16:48:00
C-Dog, I wasn’t trying to in any way trying to put you down, just make you aware of the many things that go into these covers. Negative criticism is fine as long as it is constructive. Silly, snoooze fest, boring, goofy arn’t very constructive. In other words, you don’t have to be nice, just be respectful.
— Gregg, 2008-04-30 06:58:00