Are modern science fiction covers tasteless?

[Ursa major]

Unless it's the book you've written that's not selling (and you blame the cover art), does it matter if covers are tasteless or not? It's the content we're meant to be devouring....

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

To me none of the covers in the OP look that great. Maybe my eyes are going but quite frankly all four Asimov covers are much of a muchness. I preferred the new cover for Ringworld - save as someone said for the damned fuscia, and the older Ballard is absolutely superior in my view to the new one.

But gone are the days when we used to think about book covers as art. I have a copy of Roger Dean's Views somewhere and it is brilliant. But these days it's about selling. So I loved all those golden age and sixties and seventies pulp covers with their BEM's and half dressed screaming bimbo's and ultra muscly men with ray guns - but their days are gone.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[maeda]

Unless it's the book you've written that's not selling (and you blame the cover art), does it matter if covers are tasteless or not? It's the content we're meant to be devouring....

I'm not convinced
It's like, when people are saying what does it matter how your car looks like and what color is it, when most of the time you are seeing it from the inside, has some truth in it, but some people would care, while others don't

Hi,
But gone are the days when we used to think about book covers as art. I have a copy of Roger Dean's Views somewhere and it is brilliant. But these days it's about selling. So I loved all those golden age and sixties and seventies pulp covers with their BEM's and half dressed screaming bimbo's and ultra muscly men with ray guns - but their days are gone.

Cheers, Greg.

I'm afraid i don't follow, i'm fairly positive artists from the past couldn't live of the pure air either.
Or are you saying that good cover art doesn't help the books sale in any way?
As someone who buys books i would disagree

 

[Toby Frost]

This is a bit of a tangent, but this link might be of interest. It's 100 years of covers for The War of The Worlds.

The War of the Worlds - Book Cover Collection

Some are obvious clip art and others are entirely irrelevant or downright cheap, but there are some interesting examples of the concept being shaped by the style that was fashionable at the time.

This always amuses me, because it could be for a children's book entitled "The Little Octopus Who Loved Planet Earth":

This, on the other hand, may not be the most accurate depiction of the Martians but is one of the scariest. Perhaps appropriately, the foreground is very similar to a famous picture of the Somme. The picture is by Roger Dean, who in my mind is "The guy who isn't Chris Foss" as well as being the Yes album guy (and the artist for Psygnosis, the 1980s games manufacturer).

Anyhow, digression over.

 

[psychotick]

Hi Maeda,

Sorry, just to clarify. Thirty forty years ago, especially in the sixties and seventies, book covers were in their own right works of art, as were album covers etc. The artists like Roger Dean who did the "Yes" albums, were household names. And the books and albums were their own galleries. Hell I just watched a doco about the Eagles and a large chunk of it was devoted to how the cover to one of their albums was created. (It involved a camera, a big name photographer and two days in the desert smoking illicit substances!)

These days that's not really the case. The focus of the artwork on a cover is about selling the book, not the artist. And because of that there are different rules to follow. For example things about fonts used and letter sizes. So buy a Stephen King book and notice how his name covers half the front. Notice how many covers go for the basics - a figure / face, or a scene / action from the book, a symbol to intrigue, or sometimes a mood eg noir detective. And how few would go for the War of the Worlds cover above, which is intriging and gorgeous in my view, but is less about the book and more about the art.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Extollager]

That War of the Worlds cover (wraparound) is, to my mind, one of the finest sf covers I've seen in 50 years of being interested in the stuff -- eerie, alien, relevant.

 

[gdoc]

@psychotick The purpose of a cover has always been to sell a book. In the past, cheap covers tended to use text e.g. The early Penguin editions with their distinctive orange covers and black lettering. I think the main change has been the introduction of digital technology. More specifically, Photoshop has changed how designers work. In the past photo manipulation was limited, now it is easy. This has meant instead of commissioning an illustration or photograph from a professional publishers can now hire any old designer who can bolt together several elements within photoshop, including tacky fonts and poor quality images.

As for the War of the World's cover, I agree it is beautiful. But I disagree it is about the art. The image is clearly taken from the book as it depicts three-legged aliens on a damaged landscape. It is striking for this reason - that it is related to the contents. Therefore it is all about selling the contents, to a much higher degree than many modern covers.

 

[gdoc]

In the interests of balance, here are some real howlers.

 

[Vladd67]

In the interests of balance, here are some real howlers.

View attachment 28538 View attachment 28539 View attachment 28540 View attachment 28541 View attachment 28542 View attachment 28543

Well to be honest the cover of the Gor book is in keeping with the story contents from what I recall.

 

[maeda]

I’m thinking we gave the art of the cover here more significance than most people care?
In my defence, it’s probably from the comic book world where art is essential part, and been in both fields so long, they often mix together.

Thank you for clarification Greg

The practice you described for today's covers are more fantasy related i think?
If i’m reading you correctly, there is a tendency in the field that plays the game of averageness with front cover, trying to attract as many people to the book content.
It just so happens that, as far as i can see most people here are kinda old school, and are used to see great art on the front page.

But if we move away from the book cover, good art is still an integrated part of science fiction and fantasy, and there is no reason not to stay that way, it’s about imagination, after all.

One bright example is Spectrum

Or look no further than some of the newer magazines like Clarkesworld or Apex, i would buy those just for the art.

Gdoc, don’t know here you found that Poul Anderson cover but it’s a contender for the trash art of the year
So i used google to find some current covers that are really decent, there is a bunch of cool stuff actually

Out of all those, i have read only Ancillary Justice, and have first two and Radiance on my reading list.

 

[Bick]

Unless it's the book you've written that's not selling (and you blame the cover art), does it matter if covers are tasteless or not? It's the content we're meant to be devouring....

Yes. As well as reading books, for me they are tangible and collectable artifacts I like to hoard and look at. I would buy an old edition with a cover I love and recall from past youth to replace a modern edition I already own with a weak cover. I've done this recently, with an old Arthur C. Clarke, picking up an old Pan paperback to replace a rubbish more modern cover version.

 

[gdoc]

@maeda

These are all nice covers. While the styles differ they all represent a sense of quality. Someone has taken the time to do something distinctive.

 

[WaylanderToo]

@maeda I have to honest here - the only cover there that appeals is the "Natural History of Dragons", the rest leave me cold. That's not to say that they are bad per se, it's just that they don't appeal to me

 

[Fried Egg]

Many of the classic covers are great, sure. But on the other hand, there were many terrible examples too. Back in the day, all too often you would just see space ships slapped on the front of SF books even though they had nothing to do with the content, or warriors/wizards/dragons slapped on the front of fantasy books that likewise had nothing to do with the content. It's like the publishers thought they needed to trick people into buying these books by luring them with the most stereo-typical tropes they could think of...

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Back in the day, all too often

I think often still true.

 

[maeda]

@WaylanderToo, honestly i'm not particularly fond of some of them myself
...but that wasn't the point i was trying to make.
I was just trying to show that there are modern covers with artistic effort put into them, and that diversity is still present, whether i like some of them or not is a different matter.

For example, project Spectrum i linked before, i have few of their annual books, and some of the stuff in there is really not my cup of tea, but it shows quality, i can't deny that.
They are doing a terrific job of presenting art and artist in the field.

More of the good stuff is presented in the folio catalog of sff, it's a bit more expensive market, but if one cherish a good physical book, it's worth checking out

Science Fiction, Dystopian and Fantasy - The Folio Society

 

[pambaddeley]

@psychotick The purpose of a cover has always been to sell a book. In the past, cheap covers tended to use text e.g. The early Penguin editions with their distinctive orange covers and black lettering. I think the main change has been the introduction of digital technology. More specifically, Photoshop has changed how designers work. In the past photo manipulation was limited, now it is easy. This has meant instead of commissioning an illustration or photograph from a professional publishers can now hire any old designer who can bolt together several elements within photoshop, including tacky fonts and poor quality images.

The trend to just use stock images and do a bit of manipulation in Photoshop came to SF/fantasy later than other genres from what I've seen. I assumed it was all part of publishers cutting costs (along with scrapping the inhouse readers and farming the slush pile out to agents etc.) as it must be a lot cheaper than having an artist do something unique and from scratch.

 

[J Riff]

Right. 1st thing I did with PhotoSlop, was take old SF covers and 'repair' them by going over the text, title and whatnot, usually wit the clone tool. Now, there are so many images available that tis hardly worth it. Richard Powers covers are still favorites.

 

[dask]

It's probably just me but sf covers went down hill really fast in the early 80s.

 

[galanx]

I think one of the reasons the old covers were done that way was in those days there really weren't any places to actually see science fiction. Aliens were rubber forehead actors; an alien planetscape was a desert with some styrofoam rocks; spaceships were models held up by string.