The author says:
Christian Historical Fiction set in 1st Century Roman Empire. The name listed on the cover is that of the narrator of the account, Helena Mithridates Kleopatra, who is also the main protagonist. The mask is sort of the “McGuffin” of the tale (the blood on it, however, is merely symbolic–the mask is never “bloody” in the story). I chose this design because it was simple, direct, and evocative. I made sure the typology was legible at any size. The book is nearly 200k words, so I won’t test your patience with a synopsis. These comments should be enough to go on for the purposes of critiquing the cover.
Nathan says:
Very legible, very clear. However, I see two big problems:
- It says “Roman” very clearly, but doesn’t say “Christian” at all, no matter whether you mean that it’s about 1st-century Christians, or it’s aimed at Christian readers, or both. I don’t know if there’s a simple iconographic fix which is both historically accurate and evocative to a modern audience (I don’t think the fish symbol has enough umph to do the trick); you may have to resort to a subtitle like “A Novel of First Century Christianity.”
- The first-person narrator’s name is all well and good, but where is your name? Are you going to be anonymous? Is your name going to be present in the Amazon listing? Unless you intend to be completely anonymous (which is an arguable choice), it’s your name that should be there, not the character’s. (The other problem is that the protagonist’s three-part name doesn’t immediately seem like a single name, given that “Kleopatra” seems like a first name to most modern folks — when I first saw it, I thought it was a list of three separate characters.) You might get away with “The Tale of Helena Mithridates Kleopatra, as told by XX,” but that seems like a Rube Goldbergian workaround, especially if you’re also going to use a subtitle to clarify the Christian angle. I think you should just do without naming the protagonist on the front cover.
Other comments?
Is it 200k because you had a lot to say or is it in need of heavy editing? I ask because most first-timers tend to over write.
Put your name on the cover, not the character’s unless you do as Nathan suggested with “As told by…” Make it slightly bolder, also.
Avoid borders of black or white. It’s boring and the cover edges will disappear on sites of the same background color. Keep the gradient but extend it to the edges.
This is true. My own first attempt is pretty bloated, but it is a hard thing to see from the inside. Try writing that synopses, it will help identify how much of your content is actually critical.
I mentioned it based on seeing many others as well as myself overwrite our first books. I removed 40k words from my first manuscript and some think it’s still too long (which it probably is).
It was pared down to 192k. A freelance editor I hired actually wanted me to add a bit more, so it isn’t bloated to that size, which came as a shock to me at the time.
The cover is quite good technically. My only real concern on that point is that ‘Regarding’ is a bit thin to be easily read in the thumbnail. If making that text bold helps, and does not foul the aesthetics to your taste, consider making it bold. I think that would be enough. On a purely selfish note, I adore the cropped stone effect you have on the title. I have been trying to figure out how to achieve something like it with no success at all. If you could let me know some of the details of methods, filters, and settings I would be grateful.
Moving to more stylistic critiques: Is it actually important that this cover say specifically ‘Christian Historical Fiction’? You can still use that as one of the keywords for your searches and I imagine your description will fill in anyone specifically looking for that, but I don’t see much reason to target your cover only to a limited subset of the Historical Fiction customer base in general. I mention this because a lot of early christian symbolism can telegraph a book as a fundamentalist rant these days, even when it is not. Christian focused customers are a rich well of potential readers, but I think Roman iconography and well chosen search terms will get them interested enough to read the description anyway. Tooling the art that direction as well might turn aside more readers than it brings in.
On your narrator’s name being on the cover: I did a search and found fictional character interviews and such, so I’m guessing this is a kind of in-character bit. I don’t know Historical Fiction well, but my instinct would also be to drop it, especially since Kleopatra is a heavily loaded name in public consciousness. People will expect arm bangles and sexual intrigue. I don’t know if they will get it.
If you really like the idea, I have an unexpectedly good model for you to look at: ‘The Princess Bride: S. Morgenstern’s Classic Tale of True Love and High Adventure, by William Goldman’. Your character’s name is a bit long for this exact format, but something like it could really work. Take a look at the Amazon page (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003IEJZRY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1), and note how the real author’s name is much more prominent than the fictional author’s name. Make your character a part of the subtitle, emphasize yourself.
On a side note, all that stuff with Fred Savage and his grandpa in the movie, that is in the book. The Princess Bride has about four layers of meta-narrative. It is a masterpiece of something, I’m not certain what.
Kristopher,
If I recall, I did the title typography in Illustrator as a B&W vector, then imported it to Photoshop and used it as a selection template to cut the text out of a stock high-res picture of real marble. Then I added a interior bevel and screwed with the main lighting effects until I got it looking right.
My version of the Adobe CS Suite is so old I have to run it on an old Mac under Rosetta in Snow Leopard (10.6.8). That said, if a person knows what they’re after, even a decade-old version of Photoshop will get the job done.
I used Paint Shop Pro 5 from 1998 for my book covers, so I can relate.
As others suggested regarding the recent “Atlantis” book, I would not use a character’s name as the author, even if the book is ostensibly by them.
It’s unfortunate that you did not provide a synopsis since this makes it virtually impossible to tell whether your cover appropriately represents your book. And just because the novel is 200,000 words does not make this impossible. If you were trying to sell the book to an agent or publisher, you would have to sum it up in less than a page in your query letter. What do you plan to put on the back of the book or in your storefront description?
The design is strong enough…but the cover really says nothing at all about the book…not even whether it is fiction or nonfiction…let alone Christian fiction. From the title and image alone, the book might be a biography of the emperor. What is the overriding theme of the book? You need to reflect that in the cover.
It’s pretty much a moot point discussing the typography (not “typology”) at this point since the image itself needs to be rethought.
Sorry about that. Spell check made the wrong call, I guess. “Typology” is psychological, literary, or theological term. I meant “typography.”
Where did this whole “character’s name instead of the author’s name” thing come from? The character’s name just does not belong on the cover, period. I don’t think we even need a “the tale of so-and-so,” because I just don’t care what the protagonist’s name is.
The art looks great, though!
Perhaps the kids who grew up with Lemony Snicket now consider that a viable option.
So! Obviously, it’s a great, strong graphic. Gorgeous, really. I like pretty much all of it.
Like the others, I don’t know if the Christian element is crucial, important or unneeded. As Nathan mentioned, if it’s necessary to convey that aspect, you’re not there. You could consider the ubiquitous Celtic-style “T” (Cross) to imply the Christian element, in the author name. That’s the only way I see, at the moment, to do that, sans changing the imagery. That would likely mean having to revamp the font, at least, for the byline. Not necessarily a Celtic font, but something else. Or you could simply replace the font ts with actual crosses–that would do it.
I too like the effect on the title lettering. Very nice.
The “narrator-as-author” thing that seems to be making the rounds: personally, I find that offputting. It feels a bit flaunty. Now, that means absolutely nothing other than one person, me, doesn’t care for it. But when you name the author, effectively, after one of the most infamous seductresses in history, and arguably, the most powerful woman in history (in view of her respective empire and power, at the time)–and have no intention of delivering same–I think you’re courting trouble. Obviously, your narrator is not Cleopatra of fame, but…you’ve borrowed her name. Of course, most people will think it’s your nom-de-plume, not the name of your narrator. I just think, aside from cover design issues, you’re borrowing confusion that’s unneeded. If Kleo is constrained to the interior pages, where she arguably belongs, then you wouldn’t have this problem. (@Nathan: all things considered, I do think that this is a legitimate area of cover design discussion. We talk about things on covers that confuse readers all the time, and while this comes close to being as “Author’s Choice” as the title, it does lend to clarity–or lack thereof.)
I have no argument with that.
You are probably thinking of Cleopatra VII who, as you can see, was the seventh to bear that name and not at all the same person as the “Helena Mithradates Kleopatra” of this book.
And, contrary to what the author suggests, he/she can indeed summarize the book, as see this blurb found on Amazon and elsewhere:
“Novelization of a series of ancient scrolls recently discovered in the ruins of famed Roman commander Scipio Africanus’ seaside villa (near Naples, Italy). Written in the First Century by a young woman of Persian and Ethiopian ancestry, Helena Mithridates Kleopatra, they comprise an account of how her life and destiny were forever altered by her chance meeting with Tiberius, the son of a prominent Roman senator.The pair embark on an odyssey that takes them from Asia Minor to Syria and Palestine. His goal is to rise to the upper echelon of Roman military leadership at any cost, hers to find and assassinate Cato, the commander who gave the order to slaughter the entire population of Eupatoria, her ancestral home. Their aspirations lead them to Jerusalem where both of their quests meet bloody, final resolutions.”
I would suggest that, from this description, the cover is as inappropriate and uninformative as I thought it might be.
Yes, of course, I was referring to Cleopatra VII Philopator. That was my point. The Kleo-narrator is not the Cleopatra that most folks will immediately conjure up, mentally, for the first thing, and that’s not the name of the author, but of the lead character. I think it’s practically begging for confusion, IMHO.
I don’t know what’s started this “narrator on the cover” bit. It’s obviously making the rounds, as this is the 2nd cover in a short time period in which we’ve seen it. If there’s been a “big” book with it, that people are emulating, I guess I missed it. I don’t understand the intent, or the penchant–who cares what the hell the name of the protagonist or narrator is, unless/until you’ve gotten to know that character, which doesn’t happen until you’ve commenced reading the book? I agree with Gwen’s comment on this. I mean, if you’re co-authoring a book with a movie star or someone famous, fine–but an heretofore unknown fictional character?
I agree with you, Ron, that as much as I like the piece of art on the cover, and the handling of the lettering, it’s not a very informative cover. That’s unfortunate. (And I absolutely don’t understand the earlier Christian reference, which doesn’t seem to be mentioned at all, in the description?)
I see what you meant when you said that using “Kleopatra” would be confusing, and you are right. Besides, the author should know that “Kleopatra” is not a family name. It would be as though he named his character Betty Penelope.
http://universitypressaudiobooks.com/detail.php/168
In this case, “Kleopatra” is an honorific. “Glory of her Father” in Greek.
Yes, BUT. Unless your target audience is English readers who know Greek well enough to instantly know exactly what you mean by the character’s name (which would be, shall we say, a rather exclusive audience), the fact that your usage is correct is less important than that it’s confusing to readers.
Probably right, which is why I’ll be contemplating changes in the cover in later editions. Thanks for your insights.
Author/cover designer here.
First of all, I am thankful for this site and for all of the comments posted. I only submitted it a day or so ago and didn’t expect it to get featured and commented on so quickly. I’d like to offer my reflectionson the discussion thus far and offer some insights as to what my intentions were with this submission:
1) I did not feel compelled to offer a synopsis because I was hopping to get knee-jerk reactions to the cover design alone. My biggest concern is that the cover is interesting enough to warrant a second look by a would-be consumer as he/she is perusing Amazon, and that it does not look amateurish and/or unprofessional. Another rationale for not posting a more specific synopsis was that I’m not trying to “sell” the critics here on the book itself, nor am I looking to “pitch” it to your viewers. I did not want to try your collective patience, but it seems I’ve only irritated some of you with that omission. I am therefore thankful that Mr. Miller saw fit to post one of the official synopses I’ve used online.
2) As far as not having anything “Christian” on the cover, it is my hope that my writing is sufficiently strong enough to make that distinction irelevant. If I haven’t offered a quality work to the public that can be appreciated by persons of any background, then I haven’t done my job properly, and the last thing I would want would be to indulge in “Christian charity” to excuse lackluster writing.
3) Regarding Helena’s name on the cover (pun intended!), originally the novel’s main story had a framing narrative about an archeologist who discovered a chest of scrolls in the ruins of the seaside villa of Scipio Africanus at Liternum (now Naples, Italy), each scroll presented as a chapter in the book. In the interest of brevity I dumped most of that convention, but decided to leave the character’s name on the cover, akin to A Series of Unfortunate Events by Lemony Snicket. I am currently writing the sequel to this tale, and anticipate a trilogy. If I’m able to pull all that together, I’ll probably redesign all three covers to match in some tasteful way, and then get my name on the covers somehow.
4) “Kleopatra” is a Greek honorific that means “glory of her father.” I spelled it with a “K” to put at least some distance between this name and the more famous Ptolemaic queen in Egypt, Cleopatra. I suppose this is confusing and I might reconsider it in the future, but the name is alluded to in the tale. For that matter, the name “Tiberius” might also be confusing, as the first thought the name triggers is that of Tberius Caesar, but I suppose that’s more easily forgiven, as Romans of senatorial rank only had about a dozen or so allowable male names to choose from.
5) As far as the cover art being deemed “inappropriate” or “uninformative,” I would say that I did not want to commit the common mistake of trying to allude to major plot points on the cover. Rather, I was hoping to offer a single, provocative image that implied three things to a would-be reader: “Roman,” “violent,” and “mysterious.” In that sense, I suppose I was intentionally “uninformative,” in that I did not want to give away too much too soon (like movie trailers often do), but I am struggling to understand how the cover was “inappropriate.” Do you consider it somehow intentionally misleading?
So that’s a bit of the “inside baseball” thinking that went into this cover. I am very thankful for your feedback and hope there’s more to come.
Replying specifically to 2):
Strength of writing isn’t the issue. The first word in your description of the book was “Christian” — in other words, you thought it was important to describing what the book is. It’s therefore important to convey that visually on the cover. Remember: The point of a book cover isn’t just to look pretty, it’s to attract the attention and interest of the specific readers who would be interested in reading the book. If you want people who like either fiction about historical Christians or Christian fiction (two different things) to be attracted to the book, you need the cover to say, “THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU.”
As we say here on CC.com: your cover has a single purpose. It’s not to tell the story, or illustrate a plot point, or even to show people what your heroine/hero looks like–it’s clickbait. Period. As egregiously commercial as that is–it’s reality.
My comments about the Christian element were specifically about that–you mentioned “Christian” as the very first word you said to us, in “Christian Historical Fiction” and there’s nary a thing about it on the cover. I understand your explanation–that you don’t want a bunch of Christians being unwarrantedly nice to you (no fear here, bro…), but you’re not selling your Christian fiction to your Christian-fiction-reading audience, with this cover. No clickbait, in other words.
That was my point. It matters to me not one iota if there is Christian iconography or typography, for that matter, on the cover–but it does to you, and more importantly, it does to your audience. I’d consider the old “replace the ts with crosses” idea, if the typography remains somewhat as it is. Or, possibly, the faintest shadow of a cross, set behind the main cover, just enough to be seen, to peek through and pique Christian-reading interest.
Hopefully, I clarified my commentary.
Since the book has apparently been available on Amazon for three years I find myself wondering why questions regarding the cover are being raised now?
By the way, the confusion regarding the author name seems to be more well-founded than any of us thought. On the copyright page, the book is credited to Raelenne Boge. (Bartholomew Boge created the cover), but the back cover states that the “Discovery and Translation” is by “Rosani Akhtar-Moore, PdD” and the novelization is by “Bartholomew Boge.” The title page asserts that the book is fiction. So I guess we can all—including the book’s potential readers—be forgiven for our confusion.
Why submit the cover now? I only learned of this web site a few days ago. Since I am contemplating modifications to it, I thought it might be interesting to run the current cover past the critics here, just to gauge the volume and quality of the responses. As a group, you did not disappoint.
Much of the feedback I’ve received from persons in the Christian fiction world has been positive, but one never knows whether or not the motivation to be overly encouraging and kind guides such responses. Accolades and compliments are nice, but well-reasoned criticism is far more instructive.
As mentioned in another response, the book had a framing narrative that involved the archaeologist who discovered the scrolls, so some of those references are vestiges of that convention. Yes, it makes sense that this would be confusing, and I’ll be reconsidering all this when I repackage the novel as part if a series.
“1) I did not feel compelled to offer a synopsis because I was hopping to get knee-jerk reactions to the cover design alone. My biggest concern is that the cover is interesting enough to warrant a second look by a would-be consumer as he/she is perusing Amazon, and that it does not look amateurish and/or unprofessional. Another rationale for not posting a more specific synopsis was that I’m not trying to “sell” the critics here on the book itself, nor am I looking to “pitch” it to your viewers. I did not want to try your collective patience, but it seems I’ve only irritated some of you with that omission. I am therefore thankful that Mr. Miller saw fit to post one of the official synopses I’ve used online.”
It is important to know what a book is about in order to judge the effectiveness of a cover, which cannot be judged on purely aesthetic grounds alone. A book cover is packaging. It is, in effect, a miniature poster the intent of which is to both attract and inform. A bouquet of daisies against a bright blue sky and surrounded by butterflies and chipmunks might be made into an immensely pleasing looking cover…but if the book is an urban vampire story, the cover would be a failure.
As you can see from the comments the others and I have made, the cover is generally thought to be technically well-done but gives away nothing whatsoever about the book itself. Indeed, while the cover fails in being informative neither does it get full marks for being attractive. A mask hanging on a wall is simply too bland. The elements are all handled well enough…but there is nothing engaging. Even the blood looks too deliberate, echoing as it does the shape of the mask like a red shadow. I could easily see a potential reader’s eye moving on to a cover with more visual interest.
I’m not suggesting that you necessarily do anything like this poster I created for Baen Books—
http://www.baen.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/A/B/AB0001-lg.jpg
—but I do want to use it as an example of how cover art can be informative about a book’s contents. Whatever faults it may have, the poster makes an attempt to suggest the nature or theme of the story.
“5) As far as the cover art being deemed “inappropriate” or “uninformative,” I would say that I did not want to commit the common mistake of trying to allude to major plot points on the cover. Rather, I was hoping to offer a single, provocative image that implied three things to a would-be reader: “Roman,” “violent,” and “mysterious.” In that sense, I suppose I was intentionally “uninformative,” in that I did not want to give away too much too soon (like movie trailers often do), but I am struggling to understand how the cover was “inappropriate.” Do you consider it somehow intentionally misleading?”
The cover is inappropriate in that it is uninformative. It is a Romanesque mask with a splash of blood nearby. As I mentioned before, there is nothing to even suggest that the book is fiction. From the title and image alone, it could just as easily be a biography of the emperor Tiberius. At least anyone looking at the cover would be forgiven for thinking that is the Tiberius you are referring to.
“Roman,” “violent,” and “Tiberius” are much too general. The cover may not be intentionally misleading, but it is certainly not particularly focused. Is that what your book is about? Roman violence? If there is more to it than that, than you should suggest something more specific about the book, its themes, nature or idea. The simple fact that a main character is a woman is sufficient reason alone to at least suggest her presence on the cover.
I have to agree with all of the others regarding how the “author’s” name is handled. It really is misleading and/or confusing. I think you should retain any framing narrative—even if it is nothing more than a brief preface. I did something similar in “Dakkar,” which also pretends to be based on old manuscripts and notes. My credit on the cover reads “Compiled, edited and annotated by Ron Miller,” while a brief, one-page preface introduces the idea of a recently discovered cache of materials. This sort of thing has been done many times in the past century or more.
I may indeed restore that framing narrative in a future edition.
I’m not suggesting this as a solution by any means, but rather as a demonstration of how simple it might be to enable the cover to suggest or imply something about the content, nature or theme of the book in a manner that might be more involving http://www.charliehills.com/gallery/picture.php?/291/category/3
Oh heck, why not take it one small step further? http://www.charliehills.com/gallery/picture.php?/292/category/3
Only speaking for myself, but I don’t see how adding a hand gives me any additional information about the themes of the book.
The idea was to try to add some kind of human element to the cover, something that might even suggest a relationship, romance or other kind of involvement. It doesn’t have to be a hand—it could be pretty much anything that would add additional interest to the cold fact of the mask. I thought of the woman’s hand because the contrast of skin and femininity with the dark, cold, lifeless hardness of the mask might at least suggest the existence of a story more than the mask alone could. There are other ways this could be done. (By the way, if the author is in fact taken with the addition of his heroine’s hand and she is, as he says, black, then he is going to have to be careful about contrast and values in the already dark cover.)
Two small issues: the hand is a bit too small in proportion to the mask, and the main character is BLACK, so the color of the hand is off.
That said, I like the added element a lot. I would probably have the hand lovingly caress the cheek. Do I have your permission to “appropriate” that design idea?
🙂
Well, it really was just a ten-second concept meant to get a point across! 😉
And, please, feel free to do what you wish with the suggestion.
Once again, I find myself suggesting you look to similar books for your inspiration. As it happens, the rather scholarly Paul L. Maier wrote two excellent books in roughly the same genre dealing with the far-from-quiet political and religious historical settings in the Roman Empire into which first Christ and then Christianity quietly made their entrance. Pontius Pilate deals specifically with the events of the Gospels as seen through the eyes of Pontius Pilate, detailing his dealings with none other than the increasingly paranoid Emperor Tiberius (who also features prominently in your novel as well, I’m guessing) and other dangerous political peers and superiors while The Flames of Rome deals with certain events in the Biblical books of Acts and some of Paul’s later epistles as seen through the eyes of one Senator Flavius Sabinus who was a rather prominent and powerful political figure in the middle of Emperor Nero’s increasingly erratic and unstable reign. While each of these books has undergone several printings and has a number of variant covers, I chose my two favorite covers from the 1990s paperback editions because I believe they are excellent examples of the kind of aesthetic you should have on your cover.
They have, of course, a certain version of that sword-and-sandals aesthetic you see in a lot of Sunday School illustrations for kids portraying various Biblical events; but also a slightly more detailed and mature-looking painted appearance to them because these are definitely not children’s books. (Pontius Pilate in particular includes a mention of a man’s entire family being condemned to death during a political purge, with the executioner raping the man’s ten-year-old daughter in order to circumvent a Roman law that forbade Romans from executing virgins, and then strangling her to death. Yeah… I did say these novels were not for children, didn’t I?) Basically, the artist for these covers did with that Sunday School art what the famous graphic novel artist Alex Ross did with Marvel and DC’s comics in Marvels and Kingdom Come respectively: took old line drawing art and turned it into realistic-looking paintings instead to emphasize that the art form had matured along with its audience.
In your case, I don’t know exactly the significance of the mask or anything else, as I’m not sure how much of your novel is drawn from actual history and how much is just artistic license (i.e. you making up a story about people who could have existed and events involving the historical Emperor Tiberius that could have occurred.) However, I do know that if you want people to think of New Testament times and vaguely Christian subjects, painted sword-and-sandals themed art with everyone wearing period-appropriate Roman gear is the way to go. By itself, that mask doesn’t look very specific to any period; it needs some context.
Also, I should probably mention that the poster for the pornographic/historical movie Caligula (detailing some of the more salacious allegations the Roman biographer Suetonius made about Emperor Caligula’s sexual depravity) also features a metal portrait (on a coin instead of a mask) with blood on it, so your solitary focus on this metallic mask with blood on it may be unintentionally inspiring certain prurient associations between that work and yours in the minds of your prospective readers. (Suetonius accused Emperor Tiberius of engaging in some awfully depraved sexual activities too, though most of that was allegedly much later near the end of his reign.) Basically, while you may still want to keep the mask in whatever new artwork you design for your next cover, I’d recommend focusing on something else to keep your prospective readers properly focused as well.
Thanks for your input, RK.
FWIW, “Tiberius” was one of about 18 allowable male names for Romans of the senatorial class. My book only mentions Tiberius Caesar in passing–the “Tiberius” referred to on the cover is the Roman tribune who was engaged to the narrator/protagonist. Here’s more detail on that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praenomen
A fair amount of the plot intersects with Roman history as well as NT accounts.
Well, that underscores my point. If you use a name that most people are going to associate with a specific Roman on a cover that is not particularly informative, people are going to make wrong assumptions…even going so far, as I suggested, to think that the book is non-fiction.
Every time you feel tempted to say “Well, you see, in ancient Rome…” or “Well, you see, in the story…”, stop yourself. The person looking at your cover does not have that information. If we draw a mistaken conclusion when we look at your cover, other people will too. And you won’t be there to correct them.
WRT the framing device, it doesn’t matter. Regardless of what’s inside, the name on the cover is the real person who wrote the book. Say I see your cover and decide to look up the “author” on Goodreads. I can’t, because Goodreads lists your real name. Amazon lists both; how would your readers know that they’re the same person? And what if you write another series that’s not about Helena?
Lemony Snicket is different because that’s a pen name. Presumably you don’t want people identifying you as Helena Mithridates Kleopatra.
I have to not only second what Gwen said but underscore it.
The biggest hurdle any author has to overcome in creating their own cover is the lack of subjectivity. It’s very, very difficult to remember that while you may be privy to every significant detail in your book, the potential reader is not.
A book cover should not depend on prior knowledge of the contents of the book in order to succeed.
The best example of this that I have ever run across was when I was once shown a proposed cover for a novel that was described as being a heroic fantasy adventure. The image on the cover was of a pastoral scene in the British countryside, featuring an old stone bridge crossing a lovely little brook. It would make a great cover for a travel guide to rural England, “But,” I asked, “where is the heroic fantasy?”
“The hero of the book is a troll,” the author replied. “That’s the bridge he lives under.”
I’ve posted this mini-essay before, but it might be worth repeating it http://black-cat-studios.com/book_cover_design.html
PS
I second Gwen’s comments about the name on the cover, too.
All points mentioned in the two posts above are valid and useful. Thank you all very much.
The fact that the author did the cover art was one of financial necessity. While I did work for a publishing company years ago, I do not fancy myself a graphic designer. That said, I know that simple, almost iconic images can catch an eye, so I trudged ahead and put this together.
My cover design had a two-fold design intent: 1) to be striking enough that a person might click on an Amazon link to learn more, and 2) that having read the title, a reader would appreciate the cover design even more.
From the gist of your collective feedback, the second of these two motivations was unwise. So, given your valuable critiques, I intend to come up with an entirely new cover art approach once I finish the remaining two installments in the trilogy. When I do, I will find a way to get my name on the cover and cut down the other points of confusion.