Help A Bitch Out

Avon A Requests Consultation with Oracle of the Bitchery

It seems the vast knowledge of the Bitchery when it comes to all things cover art is not a secret, especially among the publishing houses. I received an email from Lauren Naefe, Online Marketing Manager at HarperCollins, who asked if I consult the Oracle of the Bitchery to help settle an in-house debate. It seems the cover art for a particular book is under discussion, and there are two hotly-contested candidates for the coveted position. It’s like deciding the Democratic presidential nomination, only with Bitchery, cussing, and fun! How perfect for SuperTuesday, eh?

The book in question is Confessions of a Beauty Addict, the fiction debut of Nadine Haobsh which comes out November 18. Haobsh is the beauty editor who was outed by New York Post as blogger behind “Jolie In NYC”, a hugely popular blog about all things involving beauty secrets. Her nonfiction advice manual, Beauty Confidential was published in October of ‘07.

The summary of Confessions of a Beauty Addict reads as follows:

When Bella Hunter, Beauty Expert and all around magazine editor wunderkind, loses her job for spilling top industry secrets to Page 6 she thinks her life is over. And, to top it all off, she’s managed to dye her hair bright orange. At her wits end and desperate not to return home with her tail between her legs, Bella accepts a job a Womanly Wear: a magazine her mom reads. But how can she face her glamorous ex-co-workers now that she works in an office where khaki (not Cavalli) is the way of life? Bella is out to wage war on the beauty world one bad makeover at a time, armed with only her Marc Jacobs shoes, three meddling best friends, and a flighty supermodel boyfriend. At odds with her stuffy (and undeniably gorgeous) publisher, Bella begins to realize that she may be fighting the wrong battle.

With that in mind, here are the two covers that the folks at Avon A are battling over. Which do you like? What comments do you have for either one. Lauren has graciously offered 2 advance copies of the book to the two readers who offer the most helpful comment – so speak often and as much as you want.

image

image

Sarah: My opinion? Re: the blue cover – which one is the beauty addict? I hope it’s the chihuahua. I appreciate the play on Tiffany blue and the dripping-gem opulence of the creatures featured, but I have no idea what this has to do with the plot. That said, half the cover images of the romances I read have fuck all to do with the plot, so I’m betting this one will win just because cute dog + nice gems = browsers will pick it up to read more.

And as for the pink one, I am pleased the model has paid scrupulous attention to her waxing regimen, given the position of that skirt.

But oy, that font. Right up until the hot pink doodle font I was down with this cover, but man, that font. It’s so corny and jarring and utterly not attractive. I can understand the effort at contrast setting the doodle-font against the groomed couture of the image above it, but man. That font just kills the cover for me. It hurts my feelings. I take that font very personally, and am offended as an American by that font.

So if I pick between Blue and Pink? I go with blue. Even though I like the image of the pink one more, I hate the font so much that it turns me off the cover entirely.

Candy: I like the composition of the blue cover better—it wins on just about every front, from font usage (side note to the people who chose that kuh-ray-zee font for the pink cover: Why didn’t you just use Comic Sans and put us out of our misery? Chrissakes) to the way the faces are framed to the choice of angle to the use of whitespace. If I had any beef with the blue cover, it would be with the use of the chihuahua and the bedecking of said chihuahua with godawful gewgaws. I look at that, and I think “Oh god, another Paris Hilton wannabe.” And really, who wants to associate their heroine with Paris Hilton? Unless being a vacuous coke-snorting trainwreck who provides an instant win on the STD Bingo card is a good thing.

The blue cover (despite the negative associations I have when it comes to over-pampered toy dogs) also wins for me because it looks different. It’s not pink. It’s not some faceless woman (I mean, really, how many chick lit/romance books out there feature some faceless woman’s legs and/or shoes? I love shoes, and God knows I love me some beautiful legs, but enough already). It actually features (parts of) faces, and the faces are fun and interesting. If I were in a store, I wouldn’t stop to look at the pink cover (unless it was to marvel at the rather horrid font), but I’d stop and look at the blue cover.

What’s your verdict?

Comments are Closed

  1. Dragonette says:

    except old navy stopped selling plus sized clothing in store and only sell it online . cant have chicks in store who look bigger than a size 2!!

    Yeah, that seriously pissed me off, too. Mayday! Mayday! Fattie incoming!  Bar the door!  Hiss.

  2. Spider (@ work) says:

    Covers like these are exactly why I rarely pick up anything so easily identified as ChickLit.  I think they serve to confirm the idea that chick lit is for the brainless and/or material-obsessed.  Basically, what I’m saying is I don’t want to be seen with books that look like this!

    If I’m reading a romance novel, and it looks like a romance novel?  I’m not bothered if people think I’m reading something saucy.  I am bothered if I think the book makes me look “stupid.”

    I think both of these need to go back to the drawing board.  I went to your (Avon by HC) website and scanned the covers of other books recently released. 

    If I had to judge by the proposed covers compared to the covers of other books you’ve released, I’d think you were marketing this as ChickLit (like a Jo Barrett)

    But from the blurb of the back, it sounds more like Contemporary Romantic Fiction (a la a Patti Berg, perhaps).

    Yes, the blue is successful in terms of layout, but leaves you cold and bored.  The pink is just a disaster.

  3. Chicklet says:

    Neither cover works for me.

    The pink has every chick-lit cliche I loathe—faceless woman, high-heeled shoes, expensive purse. Boh-ring.

    The blue cover is inscrutable, as none of its elements seem to match up with the summary. Either the summary needs to mention Bella’s beloved dog, or the dog needs to leave the cover.

    Actually, neither cover as-is focuses on the book’s subject: the contrast between Bella’s high-fashion former job, and her low-fashion current one. Why not exploit that change of venue? Judging from the blurb the book is really about Bella’s negotiating the change in milieu, which is relatable: Everyone has been forced to live or work in an unfamiliar environment. Ergo, you should find a way to represent that visually on the cover.

    Frankly, I find the summary much more interesting than *either* cover. I suggest going back to the art department, starting over, and coming up with a cover worthy of the summary.

  4. karibelle says:

    Well, my perspective may be a bit skewed but I definately can’t endorse the blue one.  As a sufferer of severe pet dander allergies, just the sight of that model’s face so close to that dog makes my nasal passages instantly clog and my eyeballs itch like the very devil!

    The Pink one isn’t great either.  The disembodied legs are soooo 2006 and the only thing memorable about it is that whoreanus font.

    So, if I have to choose it would be the pink one but only because it does not send me running for my prescription medication.

  5. Deanna Lee says:

    I like the blue cover as well. It will attract more attention on the shelf- and the font on the pink cover is horrible. Though I honestly might pick it up in a store BECAUSE the font is horrible.

    The dog is cute.

  6. KellyMaher says:

    I’ve got problems with both, which have been ably enumerated by the previous posters and also suggest, back to the drawing board Avon!

    First reaction to blue cover: Gah! Is that Tinkerbell? I hate the Paris stereotype.

    First reaction to pink cover: Legs, again, whoopee…wait, is this supposed to be YA with that freaky font?

  7. Amy says:

    The pink is awful for a couple of reasons: (1) the cartoonish type is not cute or chic, and(2) the skinny, over exposed legs as a focal point is SO not what Nadine as an author and beauty expert is all about – she’s more the Dove real beauty type

    The blue much better, however it doesn’t sound like it has much to do with the plot of the book. Would they be willing the drop the dog all together and replace that part of the image with her hand holding a compact? I do love the angle of the chin/kissing image on the bottom right – you could keep it if you did that.

    Just a suggestion…

  8. lucinda betts says:

    Blue!

  9. JaniceG says:

    Unless her best friend is a dog and the dog is a character in the story, I’d nix the blue cover. If I were a dog lover and bought this book, I’d want a dog in there somewhere! I’m sure they’re going for the Paris Hilton subliminal message but frankly, between Paris’s flighty image and the dog’s unsightly whiskers, the blue cover doesn’t work for me. If you’re going for romance, dog lips are right out.

    The pink cover has its own problems: obviously the typeface problem (I counted at least 5, plus the small caps font change in the pull quote), the “generic chick lit” impression, and, frankly, the too-short flipped-up skirt. They *do* know they’re marketing this to women, right? Plus, most women grow out of dotting their i’s with flowers by the time they graduate high school.

    No wonder they’re having trouble deciding between the two of these: picking the lesser of two evils is always tough.

  10. The lady kissing the dog freaks me out for some reason.  I love dogs, but…

    I say the pink cover with the amazing legs (which aren’t mine, unfortunately) but change the font.  The font is too YA for this title.

  11. Amy says:

    I actually have a very random idea that could be cool.

    you know the finger to lips shh motion?

    well, the primary image it could be a hand holding a compact and in the compact’s mirror the reflection is an interesting cropping of the finger to the lips…

    it could be done with either photography or illustration and be very cute!

  12. Ocy says:

    I have to agree with Jana:
    I think the art department should play up more of a before/after.  You know how those makeover shows are—split screen so the audience can see just how awesome a woman looks with a nice haircut, monochromatic clothes and make-up!  This books seems like the opposite: Fashionista to How the Hell Did You Dye Your Hair Orange?

    There’s so much you can do with this sort of concept without going for annoying or cliché.  Why not a high-fashion woman surrounded by khakis, either in a store or at the office?

    The summary has promise, but the covers presented here just aren’t enough to catch my attention.  (At least, not in a good way…)

  13. Meriam says:

    Both are horrible. I’d walk straight past and maybe roll my eyes a little. The pink is particularly gruesome.

    The blurb sounds utterly dire, a wearisome regurgitation of every other chic lit story ever conceived. Make it stop.

    This is just free publicity for Avon and Nadine Haobsh, right? I can’t believe the second cover could be a serious contender for anything, let alone cause strife among a team of marketing professionals who – presumably – have the skill and experience to know exactly why cover no. 2 in particular is shoddy and derivative.

  14. Tumperkin says:

    The pink one I’ve seen a billion times and would never pick up.  The blue one promises humour and intrigues me enough to pick it up and look at the blurb.

  15. azteclady says:

    Meriam, your cynicism makes me smile!

  16. Julie Leto says:

    I hope HarperCollins knows what they’ve gotten themselves into!

    Blue, definitely.  I love the color…but I’m not a chihauhau fan, so I agree with those who say unless the pooch is important to the story, he has to go.  Replace him with a universally loveable dog…a Yorkie, perhaps?  Bichon?

    The pink is just…DONE.  To death.  And I can’t read the author’s name in that typeface at ALL.  The title is worse.

    Great way to get pre-publication buzz, too…very smart Harper.  Very smart.

  17. moiraj says:

    I haven’t read all of the comments, though enough to know mine won’t be unique.

    If I’d had to pick one, I’d pick the blue, because of the godawful font on the pink, and call me a prude but I really don’t like how high the skirt is flaring.

    I don’t like the dog so close to the mouth, though, either. That turns me right off.

    If it’s possible, the best option is a different cover altogether. Neither of these say anything about the story, and neither of them are eye catching (in a good way.) It’s like the publisher is more concerned with making sure people recognize the genre than anything else. There are tons of fantasy novels for which a dragon on the cover would be totally inappropriate.

  18. Gail Faulkner says:

    Blue cover makes me think it’s a dog grooming book.

    Pink cover is more romance except the font makes it look like a 12 step program for men on how to lift the skirt a little higher.

    Start over with the art. Please. Show me how the hero sees her. Or how she sees the hero.

    I don’t like the women on either cover. They seem silly and shallow.

  19. Cat Marsters says:

    My gut instinct is for the pink cover, and as a pub quiz veteran I know to trust my gut instinct (Of COURSE the capital of Texas is Austin.  Why did I let anyone write Dallas?  I lost out on my free pint, dammit).

    I don’t like the blue.  I don’t like the shade, for one thing (that’s Tiffany Blue?  It looks like a kid’s paddling pool).  And I don’t like the dog.  You know what it reminds me of?  The orange woman in There’s Something About Mary who’s always snogging her dog.  If I was Nadine Haobsh I’d get used to being known as the woman with the dog-snogging cover.

    Yes, the pink is overdone.  But unless I’ve missed the mark here, this is chick-lit, right?  It goes with pink like it goes with chardonnay.  And this particular brand, which I believe is known as chic-lit (ie: the characters actually know, and give a damn about, the difference between a Dior lipstick and a Shu Uem-thingy one, as opposed to the Bridget Jones school of chick-lit, in which The Gap is considered fancy) tends to be represented by handbags/shoes.  It’s visual shorthand, yes?

    Do you want to tell a potential reader that it’s about girlie things like make-up and fashion?  Then cover it in pink.  That’s what pink is for.  Girlie things.

    That said, yes, the composition of the blue cover is better, it’s cleaner, and it’s more striking.  I like the clean, centred fonts.  But no to the dog-snogging.

    And I second the comments about the pink writing.  I was scrolling down, thinking, “Yes, more like it,” and then I got to that and thought, “Or maybe not.”  Oh, and poor Nadine’s name is tiny—aren’t they advertising it as the woman who wrote the blog?

  20. TracyS says:

    I honestly don’t know b/c I have issues with both covers. I like the elegance of the blue one, but the dog?!  It’s jarring to see that ugly dog mug with the jewels.  The woman’s partial face is nice, but could she be looking at something other than that scary dog face?

    The pink one~the women’s body and purse are okay, but that font~it hurts my eyes!  A font that says “fun” without saying “cutesy”. That font is something I’d expect to see on Hannah Montana or High School Musical.

  21. TracyS says:

    that comment above should say “A font that says “fun” without saying “cutesy” would be better. The font on this book now is “cutesy”.

  22. SB Sarah says:

    You know, the more I look at the dog, the more worried I think he looks, like he’s afraid he’s going to get dropped. It’s probably a function of Chihuahua eyebrow folds but he looks very concerned and vulnerable. Which makes me want to smack the woman.

    But even that STILL ranks higher than that font on the pink cover. Whoever said it was very “Limited TOO” was dead on 100% right.

  23. SB Sarah says:

    Liz C. – she said it was “Limited Too.” Always cite your sources, even if it’s a slightly-delayed CTRL-F search.

  24. Lisa says:

    Definitely the blue.  The font on the pink cover is distracting as all heck, annoying enough that I’d pass on buying the book for that reason alone.

  25. NHS says:

    *smacks forehead* That’s where I’ve seen that before! It was driving me crazy

  26. SB Sarah says:

    Or “Delia’s” – could have seen it there, too.

  27. Alyssa says:

    All I can think is…what if the dog started to drool??

  28. Eunice says:

    Second comment, please forgive!
    You know, the more I think of it, the kind of cover I’d like to see would be either:

    a) something with her chic clothing laid out on a bed like she’s getting ready for work, but with a pair of khakis on top of them up (or maybe in mid-flight like they’re being thrown).

    b) model, complete with bright orange hair, taking off her makeup.

    And if you just /have/ to do legs why not have the khakis paired up with expensive shoes?

  29. shaunee says:

    Don’t know if anyone mentioned this before, am secretly posting during a deadly dull audio conference at work but the pink cover sucks not only because of the fonts and such but because the clothes are surprisingly lame for a “Beauty Addict.”  The shoes have a generic/Payless (though the Payless description is no longer valid as Payless shoes have been surprisingly cute for some time) vibe, the hem of the blouse and skirt are totally forgettable and the purse!! Great day in the morning!  Would a beauty addict not carry Gucci’s latest or something that looks like Gucci’s latest?

    It’s that holiest of times in NYC:  fashion week.  I say get HColl to spring for a couple o’ tickets to some fab runway thing to get some ideas.

    However, if you’re only option is to choose between the two, then go for the blue.  Everything about it is cleaner looking and therefore more appealing.

  30. Lissa says:

    I vote for the pink cover even though it is very generic and the fint is creepy because the kissy face with the dog takes my mind to unpleasant places. I do like Barb’s idea about having just the dog on the cover. I’m not usually a fan of the chick-lit but that idea would definitely grab my attention

  31. Silver James says:

    Can you say Pepto-Bismol on the pink cover? I need some after looking at it. That font is TCTL (Too Cute To Live). I not only would not pick up that book to see what it was about, I would RUN! Pink is just not my thing (despite all the pink on SMTB’s site – the rhetoric is so compelling, I don’t notice!)

    I love Tiffany blue. Blue is always good. But like so many, what’s up with the Chihuahua? I thought it was a silly plot device in

    Legally Blonde

    movies. Why not put a sexy cat up there? (Gah! Did I just say that? I’m a big dog person) But srsly, as the lolcats say. A cat in a jeweled collar just screams beauty and sex to me.

    If I had to pick one or the other as is, cast my vote for the blue.

  32. elizabeth says:

    I’m sure someone has already make this point. But anyway
    Dog + anything to do with beauty or fashion = bitch.
    It is a cliche but its one a lot of people are going to jumb to and possibly form the worng impression of the lead character.
    If the lead character is a bitch its a clever way of suggesting it but if the reader is supposed to sympathise with her i think it gives off the wrong impression.
    Having said that
    Pink is just wrong and not even the girlest of girls ever really writes like that.

  33. Wry Hag says:

    Definitely, the chihuahua cover. Not only is the bling-dripping dog an unexpected and eye-catching element, so is the proferred kiss and the position of the title.  Besides…there are lots o’ dog lovers out there!

    The other cover seems far too generic-chick-lit to be in the least bit noticeable. It even strikes me as a bit dated.  As a reader, I wouldn’t have the slightest interest in anything that lay beneath that cutesy, cartoony exterior.

    P.S. I’d suggest tweaking the blurb, as well—or, at least, proofreading it.

  34. Christine says:

    I think the pink is more appropriate. Where did the pooch pop up from????

    But having said that, I feel that I have seen this type of cover (the pinkie) dozens of times b4. Cute, breezy blah blah. Give me something new.

  35. Jen says:

    Something about kissing dogs just turns me off, plus the pearls make me think uppity people.  Which might be the point.

    I like the pink cover better, between the two… more movement, more action going on, more contrast, even if I do think the skirt is going up a little high, and the font is a turn-off… much too young-girl, and not enough … class, I believe the the term I’m looking for..

  36. elizabeth says:

    Just reread mine – sorry for the typos. should have proof read.

  37. Allie says:

    Strangely, I love the blurb.  Usually romance novel blurbs make me want to cry

    However . . . I can’t hold back my tears at the covers.

    BLUE

    I cannot believe this seems to be winning.  The blue seems a bit too staid to catch the eye from across the room.  While I absolutely love that there’s actually part of the face on the cover, I dislike that it still embodies the decapitated model trend by not having her eye in the picture.  (Actually, the crop looks messy because there’s just a glimmer of her eyelashes at the edge.  Her earring is cut of instead of shot nicely to play up the fashion angle.)

    As for the dog . . . ew.  It makes me think snotty heiress and it isn’t particularly cute.  The picture they chose faces straight instead of angling toward the woman like both characters are actually interacting.  (Not that her kissy face isn’t disturbing alone . . . )  The pearls are kind of pretty, but they clash with the owner’s diamonds.

    I love the typeface of the title; however, they could do something more interesting than white block text for the author’s name.

    PINK

    The legs, shoes, and purse are cute.  The skirt isn’t.  The book is marketed towards WOMEN.  Heterosexual women.  The panty shot doesn’t do it for me, and I’d be embarrassed reading the novel with the jacket on.  If the skirt didn’t blow up, I’d probably rather like the cover despite it’s lack of originality.  After all, it is about the fashion and cute shoes and a cute purse say it all.

    That typeface is distracting.  On a different novel it could be quite effective and endearing.  For a novel about a high fashion gal?  Not so much.  On top of that, the pinks used to fill the letters clash.  (Not that the photo doesn’t naturally clash with the handdrawn look . . . )

    While neither covers are true winners, I’d go with the pink.  (With all these feedback, maybe the Avon A will change the font.)

  38. GrowlyCub says:

    Those covers are both beyond words.  If this was a serious question and not just a way to generate buzz/advertise, I want to know what the marketing folks were thinking. Ewwww.

    The more interesting question to me is whether anybody here is now prepared to buy the book?  It seems like a lovely marketing ploy, but utterly unsuccessful on this particular reader as I’d rather not read another book ever than read any kind of chick lit or women’s lit or whatever lit.

    Spam word: taken98. Well, I was not taken with Avon and the covers.

  39. Bronwyn says:

    I vote for the blue one.

    Both have their drawbacks, (blue: Photoshopping on the dog&jewels is poorly done, pink: the font is a ‘scroll down fug’—to quote Go Fug Yourself—and the image of the woman is overused) but the blue one is definitely my first choice.

  40. Deb says:

    Huh.  I actually *like* the blue cover.  I will admit that the pearls around the dogs neck gave me pause but it totally brought to mind “Legally Blonde”, which I adore, and kissing Bruiser is a totally Elle thing to do.  So it didn’t squick me out like it obviously has some folks.  I also think the fonts, especially the “Beauty Addict” part are wonderful.  I like the juxtaposition of the clean look of “Confessions of a” with the more stylistic “Beauty Addict.”  The other fonts are also nice and clean and appealing.  Frankly, I’m more offput by the woman’s glittery earrings on that cover than just about anything else.

    The pink cover doesn’t do it for me in any way, shape, or form.  Is she supposed to be running?  Walking?  What would have her knee quite that high up, with the heel coming out of her other shoe as well?  It’s not a natural pose for pretty much anything other than trying to show off her latest Brazillian wax.  It’s also way too much pink in varying shades.  I’m as fond of pink as the next person but this was just overmuch and I think it gives the wrong impression.

    Others have also mentioned the fonts.  I like the font for Nadine Haobsh and Confessions of a.  But the Beauty Addict font?  No.  It does not goe with any of the other fonts.  Nor does it proclaim Beauty Addict.  It proclaims “Suddenly I’m 12 and dot my i’s with flowers.”  It’s a doodle and doesn’t go with the them of the book or the look of the cover.  It’s distracting and off-putting in the extreme.

    I don’t like the alternating pinks of the font in Beauty Addict, either.  Again, it’s a little too 12-year-old girl for what I think the book intends.  You have to wonder who thought that would be an appropriate font for either this cover or this book in general.

Comments are closed.

By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.

↑ Back to Top