• Features
• Recently commented
• Submit a cover
• About
• RSS
• Search
• Login

•  

Against Happiness

Makes me smile.

— , 2008-03-19 09:18:00 -0400

Super!

— DD , 2008-03-19 09:23:00 -0400

[this is good]

— Michael Sippey , 2008-03-19 11:58:00 -0400

It’s hard to see at first, but once you do, you realize that it’s one of the saddest faces you have ever seen.

— mo , 2008-03-19 12:59:00 -0400

against hokiness

— Aubrey Sniffenegger , 2008-03-19 13:20:00 -0400

Absolutely fantastic.

And the prize for best comment totally goes to rek. :)

— Suzie , 2008-03-19 14:13:00 -0400

I agree, eyes would have ruined it.

— Chris , 2008-03-19 14:46:00 -0400

Yes, having the title and author’s name in the form of a frown is brilliant…but perhaps the cover color should have been a darker color, maybe dark blue, to enforce the sad mood, instead of a cheerful bright yellow.

— , 2008-03-20 00:19:00 -0400

Having the color be blue would ruin the whole concept. The yellow face is iconic.

— gk , 2008-03-20 03:57:00 -0400

Cool. I admire the restraint of the designer, and the willingness of the rest of the team for going along with the concept.

— , 2008-03-20 04:29:00 -0400

( This makes me sad that I didn’t think of this.
A great job of restraint and simplicity Jenny. )

— Henry Sene Yee , 2008-03-20 04:59:00 -0400

The eyes seem implied by the position of the type. Lovely. Wish I’d thought of it (or could get away with it…).

— Ingrid , 2008-03-20 07:41:00 -0400

Ha!

— dave , 2008-03-20 14:29:00 -0400

perfect. I’ve seen this one around. What yellow will not do to attract the eye. Simple, graphic purity in this one.

— ian shimkoviak , 2008-03-21 03:57:00 -0400

oh! oh! I love this!

It makes me giddy.

— , 2008-03-21 06:29:00 -0400

It works on some level, I suppose, but I would’t pick it up.

— C-Dog , 2008-03-24 21:01:00 -0400

So succinct, clever and memorable. Great work as always.

— , 2008-03-26 12:32:00 -0400

cousin jenny is the best designer of all time! deal with that chip!!!

— michael jackson , 2008-03-27 11:50:00 -0400

I would definitely pick this up! It’s catching and it’s a simple idea executed well with no need for imagery. C-Dog, please qualify what you are saying when you make a comment.

— Anonymous , 2008-03-27 14:48:00 -0400

This cover is like C-Dog’s theme song.

Here’s to you, buddy:

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1580085741.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

— boc , 2008-03-30 10:31:00 -0400

Anonymous: qualify your existence.

I already graduated from college, I don’t need to keep writing analytical papers with 3-page bibliographies… certainly not in a blog of all places. Back off.

— C-Dog , 2008-04-03 11:21:00 -0400

Analytical papers with 3-page bibliographies?
Huh?

How about one relatively insightful sentence? (can’t use the work “sux” though.)

Seriously, Chad/Cynical-Dog, the reason I’m bothering to comment on this (for a second time, cf. “boc”) is because I’ve seen your site and I was impressed (I especially like the Kline inspired paintings). You have a lot of talent/potential. But your terse, petulant, often juvenile comments on this board are a real mystery (unless you are suffering from depression). Maybe you should back off from commenting for a while and channel some of that negative energy into another one of those great painting, you know?

— PF , 2008-04-03 13:21:00 -0400

Huuuu+uuhhh-hh-h???

Some folks believe that the Covers Blog should be taken with the same respect as the Senate floor. I am amused by this. Have any of you ever been to another website where people type to one another? I mean, honestly?

Sorry mates, but I’ll put as much honesty and effort into my comments on this website as I do in my average, chummy conversation. No more/no less. Explanation for my graphical beliefs is both unnecessary and un-forthcoming.

If “It works on some level, I suppose, but I would’t pick it up,” is enough to wound you guys, I dread to think what would happen if we were face-2-face. I think your hearts would stop…

Grow up and get critical.

— C-Dog , 2008-04-04 12:08:00 -0400

An issue I see with ripping apart a cover and not qualify a statement is that real people design these, and real people see the comments made about their design. If we aren’t qualifying what we say, we aren’t helping anyone or contributing any form of understanding. No, a blog does not need to be respected, but an individual’s work does. Unless we want to get on everyone’s bad side.

— Jason Gabbert , 2008-04-04 12:22:00 -0400

The way I see it: harsh criticism is the best kind. Banal, platitudinous comments do nothing. Having said that, I do not attest that what I type on this blog is legitimate critique, nor should it be construed that way. If we are to be truly concerned with “real, human feelings” we probably shouldn’t have a website—or society—where work is put out and posted before the world to ridicule. Opinions can hurt, to be sure, but one has to move on. Is it befitting the designer not to expose him/her to all sorts of viewpoints?

The very nature of this site is to comment, expressly, on the design of particular book covers. Hell, FWIS staff build up and break down book cover design for Publisher’s Weekly—should they not be allowed to trash something worthy of trashing? The real critics, design firm CEOs, and clients are far harsher, I assure you. One cannot be concerned with catering to egos. I honestly don’t give my personal opinions enough weight to crush, or elevate, a given designer’s whole existence—and neither should you.

Frankly, if they can’t take the heat of a couple informal comments on an obscure blog, they probably shouldn’t be in the game. They have been and always will be art critics, no matter how qualified you find them to be or not.

— C-Dog , 2008-04-04 13:00:00 -0400

*There have been…

— C-Dog , 2008-04-04 13:02:00 -0400

We Brazilians use CorelDraw to twist the frase line. Is it a vector? Use Corel. It seems Americans and europeans dont like Corel, didnt ever heard about it. Is that true?

— , 2008-04-18 08:38:00 -0400

)

— , 2008-05-05 07:18:00 -0400

Great concept—love it—
[except for the author’s font/type treatment]

— , 2008-05-21 10:55:00 -0400

its a good idea but i think i would walk right past it without taking a second look

— , 2008-12-19 05:34:00 -0500

comment anonymously or login/register