The disjointed, doe-eyed woman communicates volumes, despite the barebones simplicity of the design. And how nice is it to see a green cover every once in a while?
Hmmm . . . really? Is there no other way to depict Moral Disorder? Maybe I have to read it? It just feels a lot like “The In-Between World of Vikram Lall” by M.G. Vassanji and “The Female Thing” by Laura Kipnis, both of which, are better covers (in my opinion).
I suspect that part of the cover is inspired by the stories themselves, which follow a woman from her 20s and 30s to old age. So we maybe see her here at different points, or pieces, along the way?
Atwood and Gall are a fantastic duo; they’re soul mates on a design level. While this paperback is light years beyond the hardback version, I must agree with Pogo that it’s no O&C. It’s middling Gall at best.
The idea of splicing up the image of a person’s head to convey “disorder” is about as refreshing as swig of salt water. Still, it’s a visually arresting cover. Even middle of the road Gall is better than most. The color pallet is exquisite and the balance of the composition is pure. I bet this is a delight to hold in person. Still… I think there are a couple hundred solutions that could have conjured a “wow” in us. Looks kind of like a rough draft…
nice colors. Sure we’ve all sliced up heads, but this is a head turner. I would pick this up and be enticed to read. The choice of art, colors and legibility make this a very sell-able piece. In that sense it is successful. In terms of deconstruction—sure, it’s a simple, clean design solution with very safe treatments. The “green” is not coming through on my laptop. Mostly just the skin tones on the face and some patches of deep turquoise and the dirty pale yellow for the author.
To me it says mental disorder rather than moral disorder. Is that intentional? I don’t know, but it makes me think of multiple personalities, or being scatterbrained.
geez, you’re right. Total psycho action going on. I think that by using an old 50’s image of a prim and proper (moral) woman, Gall is trying to use that visual vernacular to bridge the popular connotation of social morality.
ian
this is a book cover for christsakes lets not give to much creedence to there being some higher ‘meaning’. If you sat down with any nmber of book covers from leeser designers you could easily draw out some sort of creative reasoning to give them added gravitas. a horse is a horse. this is a camel- by Galls standards anyway.
I’m not sure if I was pointing out any higher meaning. Just an observation that became obvious as to why this particular image could have been used. Not sure why this is a “Camel” of any sort. Is a camel worse than a horse? I think that a cover that has layers of meaning or subtle messages can be powerful and memorable. Other times, sure, it can downright stink.
There are whole books written about book covers and the subtle layers of meaning in them depending on the artist etc. I would hope this is a venue for similar such discussions. For christsake, if not for the sake of good design.
Point taken Ian- sometimes the meanings can be unintentional and are added pleasure for the viewer to discover. Was just trying to pull the debate back to simple commercial black and white- god knows there are a hell of a lot of books out there competing for attention and this divided face trick seems a bit of a fallback position, and a hackneyed one at that. a horse is a refined beast, a camel all lumps and bumps- having said that a camel can go the distance!
Another great Atwood cover from Gall.
The disjointed, doe-eyed woman communicates volumes, despite the barebones simplicity of the design. And how nice is it to see a green cover every once in a while?
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-06-02 12:04:00
I think you mean doe-eyed, not dough-eyed. :-) And yes, great cover.
— Ivy, 2008-06-02 13:07:00
That is, a green cover that isn’t A Million Little Lies…er, Pieces.
— Pete, 2008-06-02 13:17:00
I think you mean doe-eyed, not dough-eyed. :-) And yes, great cover.
D’oH!(eyed)
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-06-02 13:33:00
Hmmm . . . really? Is there no other way to depict Moral Disorder? Maybe I have to read it? It just feels a lot like “The In-Between World of Vikram Lall” by M.G. Vassanji and “The Female Thing” by Laura Kipnis, both of which, are better covers (in my opinion).
“Green” is all around us, eh?
— Arthur, 2008-06-02 15:49:00
I suspect that part of the cover is inspired by the stories themselves, which follow a woman from her 20s and 30s to old age. So we maybe see her here at different points, or pieces, along the way?
It really pops in person.
— GH, 2008-06-02 20:11:00
does anyone have the Gall to say its average?
— Pogo, 2008-06-03 00:57:00
Atwood and Gall are a fantastic duo; they’re soul mates on a design level. While this paperback is light years beyond the hardback version, I must agree with Pogo that it’s no O&C. It’s middling Gall at best.
The idea of splicing up the image of a person’s head to convey “disorder” is about as refreshing as swig of salt water. Still, it’s a visually arresting cover. Even middle of the road Gall is better than most. The color pallet is exquisite and the balance of the composition is pure. I bet this is a delight to hold in person. Still… I think there are a couple hundred solutions that could have conjured a “wow” in us. Looks kind of like a rough draft…
— C-Dog, 2008-06-03 03:04:00
nice colors. Sure we’ve all sliced up heads, but this is a head turner. I would pick this up and be enticed to read. The choice of art, colors and legibility make this a very sell-able piece. In that sense it is successful. In terms of deconstruction—sure, it’s a simple, clean design solution with very safe treatments. The “green” is not coming through on my laptop. Mostly just the skin tones on the face and some patches of deep turquoise and the dirty pale yellow for the author.
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-06-03 10:44:00
I say it’s average. I’ve seen Gall do this disjointed trick 100x over. He is capable of so much more.
— mike, 2008-06-04 00:21:00
To me it says mental disorder rather than moral disorder. Is that intentional? I don’t know, but it makes me think of multiple personalities, or being scatterbrained.
— rek, 2008-06-04 13:40:00
geez, you’re right. Total psycho action going on. I think that by using an old 50’s image of a prim and proper (moral) woman, Gall is trying to use that visual vernacular to bridge the popular connotation of social morality.
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-06-04 16:49:00
ian
this is a book cover for christsakes lets not give to much creedence to there being some higher ‘meaning’. If you sat down with any nmber of book covers from leeser designers you could easily draw out some sort of creative reasoning to give them added gravitas. a horse is a horse. this is a camel- by Galls standards anyway.
— pogo, 2008-06-05 01:35:00
I’m not sure if I was pointing out any higher meaning. Just an observation that became obvious as to why this particular image could have been used. Not sure why this is a “Camel” of any sort. Is a camel worse than a horse? I think that a cover that has layers of meaning or subtle messages can be powerful and memorable. Other times, sure, it can downright stink.
There are whole books written about book covers and the subtle layers of meaning in them depending on the artist etc. I would hope this is a venue for similar such discussions. For christsake, if not for the sake of good design.
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-06-05 08:56:00
Point taken Ian- sometimes the meanings can be unintentional and are added pleasure for the viewer to discover. Was just trying to pull the debate back to simple commercial black and white- god knows there are a hell of a lot of books out there competing for attention and this divided face trick seems a bit of a fallback position, and a hackneyed one at that. a horse is a refined beast, a camel all lumps and bumps- having said that a camel can go the distance!
— pogo, 2008-06-05 16:24:00
ian- relax yourself. go out and get laid or something
— joey, 2008-06-08 20:54:00
nirvana is washing over me;)
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-06-09 09:42:00