Book Covers - Kockroach

Saw this on display at Borders..

The constructivist style is nice, with the photo of the shoe playing double-duty as it prepares to both tread on the city and crush a bug. If you read the summary of the book, you realize how much sense this makes (a reverse-Kafka where a cockroach changes into a man, and then climbs the ranks of the city’s dark underbelly.)

The only them I’m a bit let down by is the feathering of the edges of the city. It looks hastily done. Whereas a legitimate constructivist design would have had them pain-stakingly cut-out, (or at least masked.)

— , 2007-01-09 03:19:00 -0500

I agree with your comment on the edges of the cityscape, the blur kinda hurts the overal great design.

The sloppy blur makes a great cover OK.
You can refer to the skyline images Gray puts in ‘Extremely loud’ for example..

The feathered edges on the city don’t really bother me because there’s nothing in the design that indicates that it’s going for a constructivist approach.

The design is definitely influenced by Constructivism, but the contemporary type and dramatic lighting in the background makes it feel more like a movie poster. If the background were solid color, then it would make sense to have clean edges along the buildings, and then it would have a true Constructivist feel.

To me the text also thwarts the constructivism, it’s kind of perspectivised and ‘in space’ in contrast to the flat text on these kinds of posters. Perhaps deciding to draw more on constructivism rather than simply referencing it would make it a bit more succesful, it feels a bit between two places ATM. That said, it’s a cool-looking appealing cover.

Right when I opened this page (before reading any comments) the first thing I thought was, “Now why would they just cut off the bottoms of the buildings on the right side?” The slighht blur on the right side of the buildings on the left don’t bother me, it mostly looks like light. But on the other buildings it looks poorly done.

I’m guessing the artist couldn’t cut out the bottoms because there were always more buildings in the way. Thus, they couldn’t see the bottoms.

I’m a sucker for some Constructivist references now and again (this one being on the subtler side). The angles immediately lend it some drama. I agree with Ty regarding the buildings on the right. The shadows on those buildings are also off (shouldn’t they be in the opposite direction if there is a huge beam of light flooding through the city). The sepia color that moves into a higher contrast (almost black and white) area of color of the set of buildings to the left is a little bothersome as well. Overall though, this is a nice collage of images held together with some good type.

Although the style is constructivist, nothing about the content of the cover is; keeping it from being too ham-handed and literal.

Between the type and the buildings I believe the artist chose a gradient because it attracts less emphasis the if the builds were cut out. The little strip of builings in the bottom right helps to contain the entire piece—I think the artist considered all of these things.

The couple of buildings in the bottom right break the flow of the path, which I feel should extend right off the cover. It’s distracting to have them in the middle of the path.

yeah, I have to agree with several of the comments—the blur Fs it up. otherwise the idea and strong visual play of type and image makes it a shelf pleaser. I don’t know what the book is about but I would have wrote the title on a Raid can or made a city out of various roach traps, sprays and cans.