So here's a thing that I find interesting: St. Martin's has produced two covers for Mia Gabriel's new book, Lord Savage, which came out on 9 September.
There's one cover for the ebook version, and one for the print. Ready to see?
Here's the print:
And here's the ebook cover:
Quite a difference, yes? The ebook says clearly to me, This here is a romance and there's probably kissing and more awaiting you inside! The print is way more understated and doesn't say Howdy, I'm a romance at all.
Given that many shoppers might see the book either on a shelf in physical form, or on a digital shelf amid many other covers, I wondered how they'd like in a smaller size:
Still very distinct!
I had the opportunity to ask Monique Patterson, Executive Editor at St. Martin's, about the different covers.
Sarah: I'm curious about the different covers for the ebook and print editions of the book, and what your goal is behind the different images?
Monique: Our reason behind the two covers is pretty simple. We've found that the less explicit covers tend to do well in print, in certain accounts. However, readers who buy erotic or erotic romance ebooks tend to favor covers with couples on them, so we're trying out two covers for Lord Savage–one for the print and one for e.
Of course, this isn't some new rule for us, by any means, but Lord Savage seems like the perfect book to do this for and Mia was completely on board.
Sarah: For the print accounts, do you mean retailers who have specific requirements for the covers of the print books they offer for sale?
Monique: None of the accounts have cover requirements, but we do notice when certain kinds of covers perform a certain way in an account and therefore for the reader who shops there. Print is definitely still very much in demand.
Interesting, no? I'm curious how this experiment turns out, and whether one cover sells more or attracts more attention than the other. I asked the posse here what they thought, and here are their responses:
Amanda: I really like the first one (the print cover). I'm going to assume it's a historical and I think the first book reads that genre more than the second. The second cover doesn't really designate a genre for me. It could be two modern day people, getting ready to do it for all I know.
The first also has a bit of mystery to it, like OOOOHHH AHHHH, IS HE SAVAGE IN THE BEDROOM? I MUST KNOW.
Elyse: I like the first one better too. I don't need two people making out or swans to figure out a romance novel is just that.
I'm also super over the headless couples on covers.
Carrie: Definitely the first cover. The second is the same cliche we always see. The first is mysterious and sexy.
RedHeadedGirl: The same cliche with a terrible negligee. Yuck.
Sarah: I like the print cover better, absolutely, and am tired of the headless clinch, though I know that that image communicates very quickly THIS HERE BE ROMANCE to the book browsing reader. The print cover without any people (and just a bed with some righteous bed hangings) doesn't clearly communicate genre, and I'd have to read the cover copy and reviews to determine what genre it is specifically (erotic historical, as it turns out).
What about you? Do you have a preference? Would one cover grab your attention more than the other? Why?
I think if I saw someone on the Tube reading a book with a picture of a bed and the title “Lord Savage” I’d be assuming romance or erotic romance, despite the lack of a half-naked, horizontal couple. Still, I suppose it is a little more discrete and classy.
Hey, that chap has facial hair! Possibly chest hair too. Are we getting into a bearded heroes phase?
Much prefer the print version. The ebook cover is generic. I have seen that cover so many times before that my eye just skips past it but I focused on the first cover and wondered about the book.
I like the first one better, but only by default. My love of a clinch is cancelled out by my exhaustion with headlessness. But whatever the heroine is wearing appears to be bleeding into her skin. The empty bed bores me, but at least it isn’t squicky. Gotta say, I’m so over monochrome covers.
SO SO SO SO SO prefer the print version. this is what i’m talkin’ ‘bout. So much less cliched, more distinctive—to me it takes romance seriously as a genre that deserves good design, and to me it conveys “hey, we think this writer is good enough to draw in people who would ordinarily turn up their noses at romance.”
This explains why I was confused by the cover reveal for Lord Savage showing the ebook cover when I already had an e-galley with the print cover. I have to say that I prefer the ebook cover, I just wish it showed more period clothes or other details.
I agree with Faellie, the giant bed and title tell you clearly that this will be a sexy romance, along with the “he’s the one man in London who can’t be tamed” blurb, so no need for the semi-headless clinch. I also agree with kkw that the monochrome covers are getting boring, but hey, at least teal is “on trend” 😉
I definitely agree that the still life with bed beats out generic humping couple.
And that between “Lord Savage” and a satin covered bed, I pretty much figured this would be a historical romance with open door sex.
But as still life covers go, this one is pretty boring. The bed should have something on it or near it that makes me think “ooh! Why is THAT there? Must read!”. I KNOW why the bed is there, thank you very much.
I prefer the first one too. Its not the most exciting cover I’ve ever seen, but it conveys the point well enough IMHO and is far from the worst still life cover I’ve seen. (The British edition of Memory in Death still holds that title.)
@kkw:
Yup. Totally with you.
Headless doesn’t bother me anywhere near as much as hairless, so I’m hoping that we’re finally leaving the depilated chest behind.
Although I think it boring I still prefer the print cover over the ebook cover. The title and “He’s the one man in London who can’t be tamed” is actually what hooked me. I look at the ebook cover and think contemporary – which doesn’t hook me at all because I read contemporary the least among romance subgenres.
For me, boring (print cover) wins over generic (ebook). If it’s going to be a heavily cliched cover I prefer the half-dressed-passionately-embracing-couple with heads. In fact, all headless covers (especially the headless, shirtless man PNR covers) need to stop.
Firstly can I just say that I LOVE articles like these, ones that explore the behind-the-scenes/meta aspects of romance novels and the publishing thereof! I don’t generally read reviews, simply because I’m a weird freak with tastes that never align with anyone.
Secondly, I’m so on board with the first book cover! I think mystery and “Ooooh setting and nuance and A Distinctive Lack Of Two Or More Human Bodies Smashing Together” on covers is definitely up my alley. I like books that leave more to the imagination, not because I’m a prude and can’t handle clinch covers, but because my brain is a dirty freak and can do a far better job at filling in the naughty bits.
Which, come to think of it, is probably why I love romance novels in preference to romance films to begin with.
@Jacqueline Witherspoon: A+++ for the Blanche gif. She is my spirit animal.
Another preference for the first, non-clinch cover. Initially I thought the headboard was a tiara because: reading glasses. But it still works.
@Amanda: Spirit animal. *snort* Good one.
I prefer the print cover BUT I would have messed up that bed, y’all. If he’s so savage, why is the bed so neat?
I would have put a fur thing draped across the end of it, the sheets would have been all tangled up, and the pillows in disarray.
If I were guessing, I would have picked the first one to be digital, because it’s easier to picture it in thumbnail size and my understanding is ebook covers are often shrunk. The less detail the cover has, the less detail it loses as a thumbnail.
I think both covers are pretty equal, but I would pick the second one. It’s lighter and more visually interesting to me.
I agree Lord Savage sounds like nothing but a romance and neither cover screams historical.
Isn’t the headlessness to encourage readers to imagine themselves in the picture and story?
Cover one is serene and appealing, but I’m not sure it sells the story.
How does
fit with poofy curtains and royal blue satin? Lord Savage is so bad that he slightly rumples the bottom sheet?
I’m not crazy about either one. The bed is boring to me, but I really like to see the couple on the cover. I get giddy when there’s a double cover (what’s that called?). The one with the couple looks like a contemporary. Also, what’s going on with her hands. The top one looks like she’s about to make a shadow puppet. The other looks like she missed out on the opposable thumb and has five fingers, like cartoon hands.
I do like the color schemes of both of them, and I love that the guy has some hair on his face and chest.
I’ve never been a “cover girl.” I see it’s romance, pick it up, and read the back blurb. I suppose a good cover will get me to pick it up, but it’s what the story is about that will get me to buy it.
Actually with the title and the bed, I wasn’t sure if this was romance or erotica. The second cover seems to be hot romance.
I check it out on Amazon. It is erotica.
The e-cover only changed on Amazon once the book was released. When it was a pre-order, it had the same cover as the print and it caught my eye because it was different than the usual romance covers. I actually prefer covers like the ones that show up on UK editions of books to the US ones. They seem more tasteful.
I’m wondering if the print version helps for the romance reader who doesn’t necessarily want to advertise they are reading “one of those” romances in public. Of course the title kind of say it all. lol.
Covers mostly don’t matter to me. They could leave them blank for all I care, as long as it is worth reading. Though I wonder why the headless body? Do the cover models only get a partial payment? I would prefer something other than people on the cover. I remember Fabio and did not find him a bit attractive. I was like “Don’t look at the cover, the hero is more attractive than that.” I would definitely prefer an empty bed cover than to have Fabio in it. Bleh.