|
Too often publishers resort to Stock photo libraries for covers, which are irrelevant to the books. BITGOD ("back in the good old days") they hired artists and graphic designers, who often actually read the book and then epitomised it with tempting, inviting cover art. What a daft idea that was, eh?
What you often now get (and what is now regularly derided in Private Eye as "bookalikes") is different books using the same stock photo as cover art.
The Penguin cover art we're talking about tells you nothing at all about the content of the book, gives you no clue. The rationale provided by Penguin is purest doubletalk, just empty phrases, sad to say. I have the feeling it's hasty cobbling of jargon to rationalise a bad idea after the event. Even the old economy style Penguin of two bands of colour, a penguin logo, and text, would be better.
|