This entry was inspired by Abby, who wrote to me and implored, “go to amazon.co.uk and look up Lisa Kleypas. WHY ARE THEIR BOOK COVERS SO MUCH BETTER THAN OURS?!?!?!! I am so upset about this, it’s kind of ridiculous. They just look so much classier! It’s totally unfair.”
Is that so? Well, let’s have a look, shall we? All the pics are below the fold – but the poll, depending on the browser, may be up here.
Here’s one of Kleypas’ Wallflower Quartet books, Devil in Winter (my favorite of the four) in the US edition:
It also has a hideous stepback:
And here’s the UK Paperback, published by Piatkus:
The US version of Mine Till Midnight
UK version:
This is the US version of Seduce me at Sunrise:
And this is the UK edition – I found two!
So far, with the exception of Mine Till Midnight, I do like the UK covers better.
Here’s another example, this time of a contemporary novel. The US edition of Christmas Eve at Friday Harbor, hardcover and mass market paperback, looks like this:
And here’s the UK trade paperback edition:
I confess, I like the cover with the actual harbor better—as did folks who nominated books for the Cover Cafe contest this year. This book placed fifth in the cover contest this year.
And while we’re on the subject: what is WITH the communion-hands holding-something position?
It’s communion in the Church of Women’s Fiction Covers! Take! Read! This is fiction which is given for you, to read this and think that it’s cover is twee.
Anyway, communion hands notwithstanding, do you like one set over the other? Which do you prefer, and why?
Overall I like the U.S. covers better. I think it’s the use of bold colors. I like the design elements of the U.K. covers but would prefer them only if they used some bolder colors. Of the titles above, the U.K. covers for The Devil in Winter and Christmas Eve in Friday Harbor use a good combination of understated design elements and bold color.
I also prefer the Harlequin Presents U.S. covers over the Mills and Boon U.K. covers. In that case I think the U.S. covers are more understated with the photo of the couple (called a clinch, correct?) rather than the blue covers with bold designs.
I work at a BN and one of our store endcaps is now a selection of “hand” covers – a mix of genres, but all the hands with various stuff in them (a few of the choices above). You do stop a second and look and I think it is a lot of fun.
Mildly amusing story about the ‘communion hands’ book covers. I was at Barnes & Noble the other day and someone with quite the sense of humor had arranged one of those “recommendations” shelves so that all the books had communion hands covers. At least, I assumed it was purposeful. If it was accidental, it’s even funnier.
As a church musician, I always enjoy a bit of sacramental humor in the morning.
I must admit that I strongly prefer the UK covers. Were I unafraid of the judgment of my fellow bus riders, I’d rock a neon-pink cover with bursting bosoms, tumbling hair, and possibly a horse. But faced with the scorn of a 22-year-old hipster and his copy of An Infinite Jest, I retreat to the safety of my MyTouch. Thank God for the Nook app, is all I’m saying.
Huh, I usually prefer UK covers, but I found most of those extremely dull. I liked the brightness of the US covers. For that matter, I hate the new Heyer covers. They’re not matched to the plots at all and seem insipid and dull.
I love Lisa Kleypas, and The Devil in Winter is one of my top-10 favorite romances ever. But… I don’t like either cover. I suppose the UK one would make me more comfy reading it in public, but it’s so mopey and glum for – oh – the BURNING HOT FUN inside.
But the fold-back thingie? With naked batman in the snow? Ick. Covers like that kept me away from romances for years.
I think I have a hybrid preference: lots of color in authentic clothing, no bare chests, no visual snogging required. And I LIKE people with heads. Pay those models a little extra so they sign the release, k?
LOL. They weren’t all orange. Plain ‘fiction’ was orange. Mystery/whodunnits were green, non-fiction pale blue, plays and poetry red…
😉
UK covers for me.
@Joanne: I think Wicked Lovely came out before Twilight, so perhaps Twilight was ripping off WL.
The only covers I have ever vastly preferred the UK version of were the Julia Quinn’s (sorry Shellbell, have to disagree with you). The artisitc quality of the characters on the covers reflected how much damn fun the books were.
I couldn’t even tell you what the books I own have on the cover, except for their general color. With a smartphone in my hand I rarely browse anymore – I’m online getting recommendations for my next read.
Okay, how did I manage and infinite loop link? Julian Quinn’s UK listings<?a>
I didn’t vote because I have mixed feelings about the various covers. In some cases, I prefer the US cover, others the UK.
But the shirtless guy in the cape makes me think of Edna E. Mode from The Incredibles: “No capes!”
I always wait for the UK covers for all genres. Perfect example: Jasper Fforde’s US v UK book covers, the latter are so creative and the artists definitely read parts of the books or at least the blurbs properly. I find UK books to be larger, better designed, and with what I call unbreakable spines (they don’t fold so easily). I agree with Caroline that Heyer Sourcebooks cover have awful typography compared with Arrow Books. I’m not sure why US covers like bosom and unruly long hair, but if it works for American readers, why not? The more selection the better for consumers!
Best US covers in the last decade: Tessa Dare’s Goddess of the Hunt trilogy. Those were GORGEOUS, eye-catching yet classy. I’m disappointed the next two trilogies have such generic covers.
@AgTigress I liked the modern library paperbacks which had a similarly clean look.
Penguin is undoubtedly responsible for my love of orange.
I went with UK, though both US and UK versions have their appeal. I was fine with 80s nursing mother covers, I like the elegant subdued ones too, I don’t care if people are headless or shirtless or what have you- just not bothered. But that font, and the glittery embossed font in particular, has got to go.
The US cover of “Mine ‘til Midnight” with the dark coloration and the semi-open gown has a certain sense of storyline impetus and does echo the title better. The Austen-ish figure wandering in the sunlight of the UK version makes a potential reader wonder more about what’s on her shopping list than whose “mine” is she, and what happens at midnight.
That said, I tend to prefer the British editions in most cases.
Doing one’s shopping mostly by Amazon makes one miss the overall impact of such trends as Communion Hands.
@ agtigress – I like the old Penguin covers too. I know them as a designer, not a reader (afraid I’m too young to have encountered the older ones as a reader). Jan Tschichold, one of the really key 20th C European designers, designed/redesigned a lot of them in the 1940s and he helped design the grid and the standard format followed through the 50s. He’s a really interesting designer.
Cleo, do you know this book: Phil Baines, Penguin by Design: a cover story 1935-2005 (London 2005, ISBN 0-14-102423-2)? It’s a fascinating and very well-illustrated account of the whole evolution of the classic covers, though, dammit, it doesn’t have an index. What is it with indexing these days? There’s no excuse for chickening out of an index, especially as these days one doesn’t even have to compile them by hand on 5″x3” cards.
I still have a lot of the 1950s Penguins, and they are well made books as well as being well designed.
With the exception of the first book, I also like the US covers better because as someone said above, the UK photos look too stock. And I’m glad I’m not the only one that noticed the purple version of seduced is clearly a child!
The UK covers are much more subdued and classy. They give you an entirely different idea about the novel’s story.
The same could be said about Nalini Singh’s book covers. The UK and US editions are COMPLETELY different. I bought the US paperbacks (because they were cheaper) and my Mom mocked them mercilessly because of how slutty/cheap they looked.
If I’m judging a book by its cover, I’m often turned off by pornish covers… half-naked men and women, torsos, boobs, whatever.
@Cleo: I maligned poor Mr. Baines. There is an index — I just didn’t look carefully enough.
I’m about half and half. The UK Devil in Winter one makes her look horridly skinny and like she’s slouching. But the US stepback – shudder.
I prefer the US Mine Until Midnight and have mixed feelings about the Seduce Me at Sunrise – the UK ones would be nice, but the dresses look wrinkly and frumpy, like they don’t even fit the cover models.
And the US Friday Harbor was so very very purple that it hurt my eyes. But… yet another pair of hands holding something out? No thanks, UK.
I love book covers, where would books be without them? I love UK for classy and sophistication, but I love US for risky and sometimes trashy….I know US can go too far…but that is why we love them..HEHE
amiblackwelder.blogspot.com
You have to remember that in the UK ‘romance’ is still a Bad Word mainly associated with Mills & Boon, so the covers for what we would have in our large romance section in the U.S. have to blend in more with general fiction, which is where the majority of romance ends up being shelved in the UK. Most Brits would be mortified having to pick up something gaudy.
Having lived in the USA for a few years, I’m all about loud and I’m proud of our romance genre and liked the gaudier covers. LOL
Can I just say – I hate the US cover for Mine Until Midnight. I finally gave away my copy because I was too disturbed by it (plus I didn’t care much for the book). I just can’t figure out what’s going on. Did she pass out? Why does it look she’s lying on the front of her skirt? Where are her legs? Why are her arms up? It seems vaguely sinister to me – she looks so passive, like she’s resigned to anal sex but isn’t looking forward to it. The heroine of the book isn’t passive, so I don’t get why the cover model looks so passive.
OK. Rant over. I didn’t vote because I couldn’t choose. I tend to prefer the more subdued UK look for romance in general, but as someone else pointed out, these UK covers really don’t capture the mood of Kleypas’ writing.
@AgTigress – no, I don’t know that book. I’ll check it out – thanks.
I looked at the purple version of Seduced and thought, ‘hey, period jumps, one does look like a smooth cone from beneath.’ I’m not a child and look about like that in them from that angle.
The model does have a very childish chin, though; it’s certainly not ruled out.
The cover of Twilight is ridiculously eye-catching. I’m not surprised it caught on. I think that cover opened the door to a lot of the book’s success—so many people picked it up. Good job, book designers!
I wonder sometimes if a cover affects our perception of a book’s quality even after we’ve read it. The mind is a funny thing.
It’s possible at the beginning I suppose, but books that get reprinted in numerous different editions over many years appear with a variety of different covers, a fact which can and does undermine any close association of a single image with the title. Over many years, the way in which a given novel is ‘wrapped’ by the publishers is likely to change fairly radically, and tracking this with a favourite novel is fascinating.
This, in fact, is what helps one to see the cover as wrapping-paper, which is precisely what it is. Although a prettily wrapped package is naturally more appealing than one presented in a scruffy brown-paper bag, we all know that what matters is the contents.
I care deeply about art, graphics and design, and I have strong opinions, but I would never, never, never allow my opinion of a book’s cover art to influence my buying choices, because the novel is about words, not about the picture on the wrapper. Because not all readers feel the same, all authors care about the cover-art that is (usually) imposed upon them, but in the long term, the art tells us more about aesthetic and cultural preferences in popular art than it does about novels.
I’m with the UK covers in general, though many of these seem a little too understated. At least they have a semblance of period accuracy. Costume inaccuracies are my pet peeve—like TV shows & movies set in “pioneer times” with women wearing their hair flowing down their backs.
The US version of Mine Until Midnight symbolizes what bothers me about US historical romance covers. Lacing open over bare skin, no corset, chemise, and strapless!? Forget Victorian vs. Regency. Ladies, that’s a prom dress.
Why can’t we have both sexy and a reasonably authentic outfit?
I’m going to have to go with US on this. The UK covers just bore me.
I think Kismet is on to something—I adore the UK Julia Quinn covers and think they very much suit the nature of her novels. I might like the UK Laurens covers better from a purely personal perspective, but the racier US covers jibe with the nature of her work better.
I like less flesh, less flash. I also find myself shying away from too-racy covers because I assume they’ll contain material I will probably find distasteful.
The hands-in-supplication cradling a flower, I dunno. I suppose these things get trendy and everyone copies everyone else. It’s a me-too world we’re livin’ in these days.
Not a fan of the US covers at all. I think they’re too cheesy, too smooth and glossy, too saturated, and too wallpaper-y. I wouldn’t buy any of those books based on the US covers, but the UK covers would entice me to at least pick up the book and read the blurb.
I like the US covers. The UK covers are just boring; I certainly wouldn’t pick one up if I were browsing because I’d think, “This is an awful, staid stock photo. If the publisher didn’t care enough for this book to give it an engaging cover, why should I?”
There is one exception to this rule, though. I just don’t understand the Devil in Winter covers from both sides of the pond. Aside from a brief and damply unsexy jaunt to Scotland, the main characters spend most of the book ensconced in a semi-respectable gambling hall. Um. Where are the scenes of wintry bucolic beauty coming from?
I vastly prefer the UK covers, because the US covers encompass everything that annoys me about historical romance covers. The clothes don’t fit the period on any of the US covers, the gowns are dyed in bright colours that were not available in Regency times (bright synthetic dyes didn’t come in until the Victorian era), the cover very probably has the sort of glossy finish that attracts fingerprints and the lettering is too big and too curly. The UK covers aren’t perfect, but they’re vastly better because they at least vaguely suggest the correct period. I don’t really get the need to suggest “This book contains sex” on the cover either, unless the book actually is erotica.
The only exception is Christmas Eve at Friday Harbour where the US cover is a lot more evocative (though it could be less busy) and matches the title better than the UK cover.
Thanks for posting DIW’s stepback, I had no idea it was that bad! Isn’t Sebastian supposed to be blond? Looks pretty brown on my screen.
@P Kirby
Yep, LOL it’s the cape that kills it.
@Donna: “Call me vulgarthen, cause I’m going U.S.
That’s vulgar then. Stupid keyboard.”
Snork! I rather like “vulgarthen.” Sounds like a sci-fy creature. On another BB I’m on we started a list of funy inadvertent typos; yours would be right up there. Take your bow.
As to the topic at hand, I’m evenly split. Agree that the U.K. versions seem to be for entirely different books than what the U.S. ones promise—and I believe the U.S. covers’ promises, given that I’ve read the books. Although the first U.S. cover and stepback? Yikes.
Sigh ,,, “funy” = “funny.” Stupid keyboard! 😉 🙂
I’m gonna have to go US on this one. Part of the fun for me in reading romance is the cheesy cover art. Give me ridiculous stepbacks all day over the humdrum UK covers!
BTW Mine ‘til Midnight also had a great stepback, with a photo of real people instead of artwork. Her dress looks like a cheap nightgown from Fredericks of Hollywood, but I thought the guy was pretty hawt!
http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-media/product-gallery/0312949804/ref=cm_ciu_pdp_images_0?ie=UTF8&index=0
The Devil in Winter is a toss-up for me. I probably prefer the US covers.
I think the worst hands and most vulgar cover might be the UK version of Seduce at Sunrise. It looks like her hands (in the purple dress) are clasped very down low. I don’t the know .. the whole pose looks awkward to me. I also agree she might be a kid.
The UK harbor cover is way too generic and does nothing for me.
I actually like some of UK covers better for some of the books not listed here; Love in the Afternoon, Smooth-Talking Stranger, Blue-Eyed Devil and Sugar Daddy.
i prefer the us covers for kleypas’ books. more pretty colors, i guess.
i feel compelled to add that the painting/image used for the “cotillion” covers reminded me of a stereotypical “party girls leaning in to take a picture of all of them making that kissy face pose” photo. which seems oddly appropriate, somehow. is it just me?
Probably none of the Kleypas historical covers are remotely accurate, but both the Wallflower series and the Hathaway series were set during the Victorian Era. I don’t think she has even written a Regency.
Did anyone else notice that the two covers of Seduce were actually the same model/dress, with the colour changed?