This Week's Topic
Guys, we have to talk. You all know what a cover lover I am. Because of this, I put a lot of weight on the cover. It has a job to connect me to the story and evoke some sort of mood that matches the book. But this whole need of mine has been thwarted by some of the most recent cover trends.
I don't know about you, but I find the faceless people sort of creepy. In fact, I am positive there were scary monster types that looked just like this in movies and on TV. I want to say that I actually read one of those books and enjoyed it despite the creepy cover. I still cannot wrap my head around this trend.
My daughter had mentioned that she didn't like faces because she wanted to assemble her own image of the characters while reading, but she didn't mean take the faces off. She just preferred profiles, faces in shadow, no heads, or shots from behind. I am sort of wondering why this choice was made to give the faces no eyes or noses. How do you feel about faceless covers?
NOTE: This is by no means a judgement on the book. I have read two creepy cover books (Catch a Wave, The Rule Book) and enjoyed them both.
Now it's your turn!
Let us know in the comments!
I like the illustrated cover trend - particularly when it actually matches the mood of the book (fun, light, not too deep). I've also noticed the faceless trend and agree it is a bit odd - like, especially that Emma St. Clair cover above? It definitely looks unfinished.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about illustrated covers. I hate them being used for heavier books, but I tend to like them. This though. Why no face? Are they in the witness protection program? I don't get it.
DeleteIt's no secret that I'm not a fan of the cartoon-ish illustrated covers. It's a trend that has been run into the ground and now virtually ever new romance cover is given the cartoon treatment. I find it a huge turn-off. That being said, the faceless cartoons somehow make it even worse. I can't imagine why they think faceless people are somehow appealing but it's a hard pass for me.
ReplyDeleteI have been seeing cover "glow ups" where the originals are being replaced by illustrated ones. I don't hate them, but I agree that they are being over done. The faceless is worse. I am glad I was able to look past the cover, but if I had not seen a review that made me pick up Catch a Wave, I probably wouldn't have read it because of the cover.
DeleteNope I hate it. It is so creepy! Especially like- that one man has a beard but no nose, how the heck does that work!? I like illustrated covers a lot, but then you gotta illustrate the whole person! Or like your daughter said, have them facing away or something! And the more up close the character it is, the creepier it is- I am running FAR from Just Don't Fall!
ReplyDeleteCreepy is the feeling I get. I swear there were people in a Twilight Zone episode that looked like this. Yeah, Just Don't Fall is an odd, vacant looking woman. I don't know. Maybe they couldn't afford an artist that could do faces?
DeleteI agree with you. They give more 'creepy' than 'cute'. Part of me also wonders if this is just a money saving thing...like surely it can't be that right?
ReplyDeleteThat is my suspicion because I think faces are harder to draw. Regardless, I am not a fan.
DeleteI feel like it works for the 2 and 4th where the faces are small, gives me a sort of artsy scrapbook feel? The 1st sorta works because the faces are in profile, but it looks like they have everything except eyes, so why not just add eyes at that point? But the 3rd one, the focus is on the face! But there is no face! That is a weird decision. Especially when everything else has shading, but the face is just flat.
ReplyDeleteI can agree with that, somewhat. It's definitely less jarring with the smaller images than that large face front and center. It's an interesting artistic POV you present.
DeleteHaha, I thought the same thing Ethan did - or more like, the one you did ("faces are harder to draw"). I didn't know this was a trend...and regardless of the creepy factor, it's simply lazy and hideous (especially when you have a close-up of a featureless face like in "Just Don't Fall" 🤢).
ReplyDelete"Why no face? Are they in the witness protection program?"
You crack me up.
It's a newer trend because I keep seeing it, but I have not clue who thought it was a good one.
DeleteI don't like the missing face either to be honest, that just feels weird and like the main character is an AI...
ReplyDeleteHA! Maybe that's who drew the picture
DeleteNot a fan of the faceless covers at all! They are creepy! Did the Fembots on Bionic Woman have faces? I don't think they did and they creeped me out as a kid. It was a 70s show if you didn't know. I'm dating myself here, lol!
ReplyDeleteHA! I totally forgot about them. (I also watched that show as a kid)
DeleteOh, I agree! It's like the illustrator got lazy and didn't want to finish! Ha!
ReplyDeleteThere has to be more to this story!
DeleteI've seen these too. I hate it. I wonder if the publishing companies want these stories to be self-insert for the reader? Like, you're supposed to imagine your own face on the empty heads? I wouldn't do that. I'd just imagine the characters without faces and laugh the whole time.
ReplyDeleteMy daughter was just saying to me that it's a popular thing. I don't know. How do they eat? It's a romance, how do they kiss? Now you have me imagining them with no faces.
Deleteomg I used to do SO many cover trends posts. I didn't notice the faceless covers and now I will never be able to unsee this. EEEK not a fan....
ReplyDeleteHA! It's seems most of us are not fans.
Delete