Book Covers - Vermeer in Bosnia

This is one of those covers that I like so much, I’m a bit hesitant to even comment on it.

The book is a collection of short essays about various works of fine art. (The author contributes to McSweeney’s regularly, if that gets you a little more interested.)

The cover is brilliant in its simple elegance. The structure is based on the back of a canvas frame; the one element all the works in the book would share.

The piece in the center is The Lacemaker by Vermeer. I have no idea what pseudo-camo is, acting as the stretched canvas which has been pulled around the back.

— , 2007-05-07 05:15:00 -0400

Also, as an aside, I sometimes have a slight panic attack when commenting on covers like this.

I ASSUME I’m right about the concept of the cover, (in this case the back of a frame), but for all I know I’m completely off base. It’s a bit of a plunge and I’m sure a day will come when I make a total fool of myself.

One of the big restrictions art galleries and museums make on art reproductions on covers is that image has to appear in its entirety with no type overlaying it. I think this turns that restriction into an advantage and makes for a great cover.

I think the camo looking border is just setting the mood and colors of the time, the art and the general feel of the book. To me it acts as a hint to the feel of the time. I wonder if that pattern wraps around the book? It also ads a delicate strength to the whole cover.

I am not sure if the whole thing is meant to come off as a stretched canvas. Seems to be playing off the theme of a recessed, delicate, fragile art piece (Mona). Something to be hankered after…

I’m being very picky here, but that sliver of color cutting off so close on the bottom right bugs me. Otherwise, everything sits pretty perfectly—even if I do have to turn the book on it’s side to read the LA Weekly quote… I guess it makes for an engaging cover which is what Gall is good at.

The cover for Robert Hughes’ Nothing If Not Critical also features the back of a canvas, but much more literally: http://tinyurl.com/354m6k

I think the camo’s probably a reference to Bosnia’s recent war history.
Regarding beauGeste’s comment, I don’t understand why museums can get away with restricting overprinting or cropping of these old paintings: “Accurate photographs of visual artworks lack expressive content and are automatically in the public domain once the painting’s copyright has expired”. At least that’s what Wikipedia’s page on Public Domain Images says; but maybe that’s not the most reliable source…does anyone else know more about this?

Another intriguing, satisfying John Gall design. The camo border reads immediately as “Bosnia” – I recall the Serb generals always swaggering around in the stuff. Great and subtle use of this element, and a nice contrast with the Vermeer (two very different fabrics!).

As to Rachel’s question, I believe historical artworks that have passed into the public domain (? years old) are fair game for cropping, overprinting, etc. and this piece would have been. Restrictions on the work of living artists or by their estates or copyright holders can sometimes be gotten around by offering (in contract) to reproduce the art unmodified SOMEWHERE on the cover (backad, back flap, inside back cover for pb) in exchange for creative elbow room on the front.

For some reason, the square with lines reminds me of the back of an envelope with a wax seal….not intentional, I assume>

From a designer’s perspective, that wikipedia blurb is pretty heartening—-except that I’ve never seen enforcement come down on that side! As a general rule, I’ve found that the more alive the artist the less flexible the overprint rights, for the very reasons Tom points out.

Ultimately, it produces a pretty humorous disconnect. I’ve had reps/agencies freak out about even the slightest recropping of their (relatively unknown) artist’s work, and yet I’ve totally butchered some Classics to my own end (a Brueghel comes to mind for one title.)

I really love this cover. It has such an inner life. The overall design (even more than the Vermeer itself) suggests a kind of tinkering or kinetic exploration that’s very similar to Weschler’s own creative process.

maybe the camo signifies control. control of the military punks over the fine arts of bosnia. or of vermeer himself during choas! but subjective opinion doesnt count in aesthetic.

i like the layout. the name vermeer alone could be interesting plus a small piece of his painting in the middle stretching the white canvas over the camo. the fine arts influenced the military? or the fine arts is safe in the military fences?

another JG’s fine work! what a guy! i wonder whats on his mind ryt now? have anyone talk to this guy in person aside from ben?

I hear he works from a cave in the Andes. Taking assignments by courier pigeon and sending his mechanicals back in baked clay.

I wonder if there’s an Operation Bosnia Borzoi on the spine—I love the camo!

Well, this looks like a book I’d love to read—based more on the content than the cover, though.

John Gall is my favorite designer. His eye for composition is unmatched to be sure.

However, I don’t completely get this cover. The composition on a whole is balanced and great—it catches your eye. I think the placement of the text is wonderful.

I really don’t get the “back of a canvas frame” concept. I’m an art collector and I own a gallery, but I fail to sense that this cover is mimicking any sort of stretched canvas—the diagonal lines don’t make sense in that regard and why would there be a tiny Vermeer on the back of a (Warhol camouflage?) canvas?

The camouflage and the 17th century Dutch realism contrast well enough I suppose. But I’m a bit confused as to why those two styles should ever be together… seems a little awkward. Maybe it makes sense with the content.

Not really sure what the diagonal lines are for, other than to divide the text up. In the end it works well (strong composition based on balance and color), but when you scrutinize every part you begin to realize how closely it comes to complete failure.

vermeer/bosnia, peaceful painting and a chaotic country. i like the portrayal of the painting, its like in a window, hole, perfect shaped kaliedoscope or something. its like peeping at the heart of the book. but the camo frame? like serving a cake with a vinegar dip.

C-Dog: from what I remember of being taught how to stretch and prepare canvases, the process for sizing the canvas bears some literal connection to the diagonals. The first strokes you make on raw canvas go from corner to corner. You apply size across the diagonals first. When a paniting is finished, you can often still see where these first marks of the brush have bled through the material.

I love this cover. Love the shock of the abstract camouflage against the classic painting and the beautiful white with such a clean and strong type treatment.

In the end, after reading all of this—this cover is fun. Confusing? Intriguing? Odd?—that and more. But to me that makes a stellar design. Something to ponder—and ultimately it grabs your attention. Not for the type, the camo, the Vermeer, the hint at a canvas, war or fragile piece of art etc—but for all those reasons coming together to create an attractive piece of art. Commercial art. Pop art. It’s definitely thought out though. Not just art for art’s sake.

A final thought (don’t tempt me beauGeste and Auguste:)): I think after reading all these comments another idea here is that this small aspect of the time, a Vermeer, had the potential to stretch it’s canvas and overshadow the turbulent times. A break. A peaceful serenity with a backdrop of war.

So C-Dog, what sort of paintings make it past your stringent acceptance policy in this gallery that you own?

K-Bone, I’d link you if I wanted to divulge myself;) Anonymity is comfortable for the moment.

Matt, if what you say is true then I suppose the lines begin to make sense, but I confess I have no knowledge of that type of stretching, and it’s certainly not an obvious technique to any layman.

Kevin, I specialize in 19th-century and early 20th-century American art, as well as impressionism, post impressionism, and modern to contemporary art. I’m writing my dissertation of several lesser-known American artists as well as Singer Sargent.

Incidental, as I look at this cover again, I get the feeling of a small, tabletop picture frame—with the thick bevel receding to the Vermeer. I should have articulated that feeling earlier—apologies if someone already has. So in that respect, the design begins to make more sense.

I saw this painting in real life at the Louvre last year, and it has an enormous wooden border (although it’s only about 2/3 the size of the one here). The actual painting is tiny–about the size of a 6×4 inch photograph from memory. The diagonal lines were apart of the frame too, from memory–but obviously the frame has been recolored from a dark stained wood to the pure white seen here.

This cover is all about perspective. The type gets smaller as it approaches the inner image. Vermeer was obsessed with perspective to the point that he used a camera obscura to produce his paintings. So you get near/far, now/then, abstract/figurative…

But why the Lace Maker image?? What significance does it have? Has anyone ready the book to shed some light on that? It’s an odd choice taking into account that there are so many Vermeers that could have done the job better and reproduced with more clarity…

Hold the book in your hands, Ian. It has been my experience that when I pick up one of John’s covers, I don’t have to ask myself “Why this image” because the question answers itself, that’s the magic of John Gall. He is my favorite designer, too.

Yeah, I actually ordered it a few days ago—should be here soon… Hope it’s a good read—cause this one I am REALLY buying just for the cover…

It’s one of my favorite books, Ian, if you’re worried. Weschler is a wonderful writer, and his essays take you all over the place. It’s not so much a sit down and read all at once book, but a book to be consumed in portions (essay by essay).

I second Margaret, Ian. You’ve chosen wisely. But if you really wanna have your mind blown, (especially as a visual person) you should also check out Weschler’s book “Everything That Rises.” It’s about visual “convergences,” or how one thing/image/event can remind you of another that is completely different, and the exploration of the space in between. Sounds gimmicky. But in Weschler’s capable hands it becomes a minor revelation.

I know, I have Everything that Rises. Brilliant, conceptual work. Thanks Sergio.

Oh wow. I would have never thought those classical colors would work well with the camo colors. It doesn’t feel out of place to me, but there is a definite disconnect there that works well.

I do definitely get the “canvas” effect from it, but not unless I look at it long enough to think about it.

I like the type treatment, but it confuses me if the effect is supposed to reflect the back of a canvas. It looks REALLY good, but I sorta don’t get the concept….

Re: copyright issues and—in this case—paintings in the public domain. While the painting itself may have passed into the public domain, the photograph of the painting is in fact covered by copyright. The owner of the painting controls the photographs of the painting controls how the painting gets seen (or not).