Comments on: Okay…

By: Lucy Monroe

Lucy Monroe — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:40:46 +0000

BTW…yes, I love the cover and the story sounds incredible too!

By: Lucy Monroe

Lucy Monroe — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:39:50 +0000

Well, I think leaving the face off started as an avant garde artsy idea that caught on and is everywhere now. But talking about it with editors at my ST houses, we all agree it helps with the reader complaints that the faces don’t match their image of the person inside the book. It’s a lot easier to match a body type, or an idea of a character than what a reader imagines that person to look like. I’ve personally heard from tons of readers who love those types of covers for just that reason. Now me…I’m not a cover person, so I don’t care. My sister on the other hand has put back books by favorite authors because she finds the cover models unappealing. Now *I* find THAT mysterious! LOL

By: Diane G

Diane G — Thu, 03 Nov 2005 14:22:14 +0000

That cover certainly is eye-catching! Yeah, I do find the leaving off of faces interesting. Not sure why or what it means but I think it can’t help but catch your eye because we’re so used to looking at people’s faces when we first meet them. But you look at these book covers and all you see are legs or chests or torsos.

By: Lori Devoti

Lori Devoti — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 12:55:31 +0000

I think it adds to the mystery. I don’t think the cover would be anywhere near as effective if you could see her face. It really reminds me of a Kelley Armstrong or Kim Harrison cover. They never show the face either. Kim Harrison doesn’t even show her face in her publicity photo inside her books–and I’ve seen her, there’s nothing scary for her to be hiding. :)
Lori

By: Teresa

Teresa — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 02:14:59 +0000

I agree–very nice cover. What is it with leaving faces off of covers these days? Does it add to the mystery? Are they saving money by using second rate models with great bodies and disfigured faces? Does it make it easier for readers to identify with the characters?