Book Covers

As GH informed me yesterday, there are two other covers in this Camus series. All three of which were designed by Yentus.

I like the cover for Exile and the Kingdom almost as much as I like the cover for the Plague, which is saying a lot.

— Ben Pieratt, 2007-02-13 08:24:00

Yes, they’re great to see in person. Although sometimes the Exile and the Kingdom cover gives me a headache. Maybe that’s the point with Camus though.

I’m curious: have you folks read the books whose jackets you critique on this site?

Surely this is something the designer will have done (to some extent) before designing a jacket. At the very least, the designer will have been given an idea of the book’s content: its subject, its plot and style, its scope or ambitions — as well as some sense of the book’s intended audience… Basically all of the “context” from which a designer must extract, and then convey to consumers, an aesthetic correlative; hopefully producing a meaningful and aesthetically engaging “feel” for the book’s content.

If one hasn’t read these books, I’m curious how one makes assertions about the success or failure of a book’s cover design?
By definition, design does or doesn’t have aesthetic merits strictly its own, but isn’t “context” the essential factor by which, especially in the case of books, design should be judged?

l’art pour l’art’ can never be the rule for jacket design. Indeed, “judging a book by its cover”, is justly the most infamous example of how criticism can fail to be meaningful. Would not “judging a cover by its book” be the better and more instructive model for the critiques found on this site?

Note: I’m not addressing these Camus designs in particular, but as it’s the most current posting, I’m hoping to elicit any thoughtful responses to my questions.
Without intending disrespct, I’m just baffled by the comments on design posted on this site. Can “wow”, or “I like it, but I don’t care for the font”, or “Absolutely awwwwwsome!” be useful to anyone? Do such comments respond to the opportunity offered by this site’s stated purpose: “the appreciation of book cover design”?

1. Sometimes.
2. Either you like something or you don’t. This is a public forum.
3. Define the context.
4. Perhaps. Talk to Ben.
5. “Absolutely awwwwsome” sounds appreciative to me. I’ve received ’”fuckin A!” in response to work I’ve presented and that suits me a whole lot better than discourse…

Pondering M. Kellner’s comment above, it’s fair to say that many of these cover discussions begin with a solid contextual assessment from Ben or Eric. Sometimes, as in the recent posting for the Dostoevsky novel, a striking cover will be introduced asking for others to find the link back to the text.

As a designer who works exclusively for a book publisher, it’s obvious that covers have got to work bloody hard to get noticed and—of course—get sold. To find some striking aesthetic correlation with the text is great, but it’s not easy and even if it meets with the approval of the publisher, there can be the (sometimes hopelessly ignorant) reactions of the sales force to reckon with. And then there’s the end user: the book buyer who might browse a shelf or table for all of a few seconds. Throughout the design and production process, there are some big compromises and concessions.

I think that there should be room on a forum such as this for such raging superlatives as those mentioned, since they are honest affecting responses. People will buy these books BECAUSE of the cover! For the publisher who is making money selling great looking books, it’s quite clear that the design has ‘succeeded’, regardless of its contextual merit.

That said… I’ll admit that the most joy and satisfaction comes from those rare covers that successfuly manage to integrate great looks with a link to the text…

...which brings me back to these Camus covers. As a Camus fan, they excite me very much, since they work so simply: such pure interpretations of the text. Especially The Stranger—which centres on the killing of an Arab, which our ‘hero’ explains was ‘because of the sun’. This black-and-white ‘flash’ treatment conveys so well the sun’s intense glare and the murderous bang of the gun.

I have a 2001 Allen Lane/Penguin Press copy of The Plague which is also a rather beautiful—if somewhat obvious—thing. Here’s a link to a rather poor image (only one I could find I’m afraid):

The cover could have come straight from the 1960’s, when Op Art, which this cover resembles, was a major influence.

M. Kellner: if you click on the book cover, it takes you to the amazon.com page that has a summary of the book – which contains about as much as your typical book cover designer might get in order to design the cover. We read this if not a good portion of the book when we spot it in the book store, and by allowing users to click right through and buy the book, enable them to purchase and read the book as well!

That said, I think there’s room to discuss merely the graphic strength of a cover without needing to know its contents; indeed if one can draw meaning from the cover alone, without knowing anything about the book, its likely a successful jacket indeed.

Kellner, great questions. We appreciate you taking the time to so eloquently state your beef.

Our approach with “judging” these covers is that we treat the covers as though we were a customer that had just seen the book on the shelf. We gather what basic information we can from the spine, back cover, amazon description, etc, then react accordingly.

The fact is that while book covers should be in direct response to the content of the book, that doesn’t negate the fact that if a cover doesn’t engage my interest, (be it by making me laugh, or make me Ooohhh and Aahhh) within the first couple seconds of my having processed it, then it has failed. No amount of clever reaction to the context of its contents can change that (alliteration!).

Ultimately, it is our position that the success or failure of a cover is ultimately determined by how efficiently and effectively it (a) communicates the contents of the book, and (b) engages me as a potential buyer. This approach negates the need for us to read the entire book before we can pass judgement on its cover.

Well, the offset rectangles do very little for me—by way of capturing my attention or intriguing me aesthetically. In fact, I believe I’m having an adverse reaction to that cover. The placement of the text amid those graphics is harsh and a bit asinine.

I like the second cover here. The jagged pointy bits seem to work, though I’m not having a designgasm over it or anything.

M.Kellner: One of the goals for effective book cover design is to elicit an emotional response from the consumer. So if someone compliments a cover with “wow” or “this is badass,” in a way, that goal was achieved. Producing a consumer reaction sells books, right? I understand your point but just because every response to a design isn’t philosophical, doesn’t mean that type of creative criticism (or compliment) should be thrown out.

it’s amazing how much a black and white cover can elicit from a group of thoughtful people. As alway—I’m easily please when it comes to black on white. Something about those early days in design class learning about contrast and thinking that the world would be easier for a designer in black and white.

i agree with M.Kellner. A “wow” says too little to be an useful criticism. I have read Camus; “Exile”’s geometry associates for me with Ancient Greece, Babylon… Remember the geometrical ornaments? ... Camus wrote ‘The Myth of Sisyphos’ ... there is this connection, and some others, between the cover and the contents. But of course, a proper critical evaluation would require much more space than a single-line comment.

...makes me queasy which is ok, i don’t understand the relationship or rather the non relationship of the typography to the art.
Lu-ceeee!—splain.

the lines are alive. powerful simplicity. infinitely effective in creating tension and mystery… love this series.

I love this cover. I love all the new Camus covers. I’m buying them even though I already have other editions.