Letters to the Editor
-
Publishers think women are stupid?
Flory and BS certainly bank on a niche audience of stupid women who are easily pandered to.
-
Obviously the publishers of Salon
think women are stupid.
Evidence? Broadsheet.
"Broad"sheet! Jeez! I guess it's a clever pun. I'd prefer not to be called a broad though - thank you very much. And pretending this haven of female chauvinism and gossip is feminist is particulalry appalling. I mean, don't you have some young exploited starletss to abuse for being the wrong kind of woman?
(Too harsh? Guess I'm still really grossed out by the Daddys little hurl column just prior to this one.)
-
Oh, Healthyskeptic...
Why hang out you in neighborhood you obvious no like?
As for Svutlana and book cover, unfortunate, is true: certain book scream chick lit. Other book scream beach book and other book scream serious fiction. Publisher no think women stupid...just send subliminal signal through color choice, font and body part.
Serious fiction have abstract cover. Write me book one time and choose serious artwork for cover (Svutlana go for small publisher and get for choose cover). But maybe should have pick body part and shiny cover if want for sell book.
Svutlana
-
Publishers think
everyone is stupid. And enough people prove them right that they don't have to change their minds.
-
Can someone explain the "women's body parts" thing to me? Cuz I don't get it
I first saw in the Dworkin-Mackinnon anti-porn ordinances, and have heard it repeated around the feminist web many times, but I just don't see what the problem is. In my straightward, naive eyes, i don't really see how this is in any significant way related objectification of women.
Help?
-
Welcome to the club!
In my mind the people who design book covers are equivalent to those who design movie trailers, that is, nitwits who had nothing to do with the actual creation of what they're trying to represent.
Sci-fi/fantasy novels suffered through decades of mostly misleading and often downright misogynistic covers on often excellent books. They've mostly become nostalgic kitsch at this point, do an image search for Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan, but some of stereotypes remain simply because some of it actually is/was that bad.
Of course you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, but feel free to roll your eyes at as you turn it over to read the back. Sooner or later, it will get better, but you have to read them first.
-
Why Book Covers
All book covers give the reader a particular feeling about the book. The feeling might be "this is a great beach read" or it might be "I'm intellectual and I read better books than the hoi polloi". If book covers didn't work to increase sales, the publishers wouldn't spend the money on them, and all books would have plain brown wrappers.
I'm not a big fan of the "woman with her head cut off" historical covers, but they appeal to readers in a certain way. The intricately detailed dress and the rich background gives the reader a sense of the historical period and clues the reader in as to what type of book it is (probably a detailed historical novel based around a female protagonist), but since the character's face isn't seen, the reader can use her imagination to build an image of the character in her mind.
I don't think that's "stupid" any more than other book covers are stupid. It's conveying a message to the buyer so she'll pick the book off the shelf in the bookstore. It's no different than the covers used to sell to other buyers, including men. Take a look at some of the sci-fi covers, or adventure books, or Westerns. No more "stupid" than using an image of a woman to sell to female readers.
Unfortunately, a lot of publishers seem to look down on their readers, particularly female readers. Even though women are often their best customers.
-
I've noticed it too
I've noticed the odd body parts on covers for chick-lit meme too, and never really understood it. Why does putting a back or shoulder or god help me an elbow in soft focus on the cover help sell the book to women? It ain't like the guys are lined up to buy these things.
-
I'll give them a break
A book jacket is an awfully small space to work with as a photographer or artist. If you cram an entire human body into that tiny space, you can't really see much detail anyways.
-
And remember
In that tiny space, you have to create an image that can attract a potential buyer from across the store. Someone who's probably near-sighted anyways because she spends too much time reading.
-
@LeCastor
Those critiques about "objectification" through not showing faces are so old they're quaint. I imagine (hope) feminist studies classes have caught up with the incredible explosion of stylized imagery that has taken place since 1985. The original critiques were valid in context, I think, but cum-shot porn is an entirely different matter from a bare shoulder on the latest chic lit offering. But I'm afraid I'm really far behind on the feminist scholarship these days. I am way too busy with actually having a life. (However, the fact that Camille Paglia still hasn't gone away is just sad. She was on VH-1 when I was in college, and that was a long time ago. And it was VH-1! Even the president was on MTV back then.)
-
Nobody's thinking about women -- they're thinking about consumers!
Publishers don't (necessarily) think women are stupid -- they think women will buy books with vaseline-lensed cover art. My guess is they're right.
This woman may prefer another type of cover, but that's no accident -- I'm marketed to, too, just not with gauzy dresses.
-
Don't get me started
The ones that really irk me are the chick-lit covers with highly unrealistic illustrations of pencil-thin women.
-
@luneluxe
"The ones that really irk me are the chick-lit covers with highly unrealistic illustrations of pencil-thin women."
Um, just like our own dear BS logo?
-
chick lit covers
Even worse are the books with drawings of martini glasses, high heels, and other vaguely sex-in-the-cityish stuff. Publishers who commission such awful covers should be punished by being forced to look at them.
-
I believe it's called marketing
These covers scream to men "Please don't read me!" while to women they coo "Here's more of the same!"
Exactly. The cover is supposed to get you to pick up the book and buy it. If you bought four others with the soft focus body part, then the similar cover tells you this is the kind of book you like so pick it up and check it out. It's not really any different than Tom Clancy-type books that all have the same kind of cover, or "serious" writing that tends to have arty or very plain covers.
Why would they deliberately design a cover that does not appeal to the intended reader?
I believe the issue is thoroughly "covered" here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4xF5TeHf5QQ&feature=related
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlynf--lsxA