Judge a Book's Cover: Part II

Before there was AI slop, there was illustration slop. A prime example of this are the millions of atrocious book covers flooding the market. Believe it or not, there was a time when books were a precious and valuable possession.

We will embark on another journey exploring the art of covers, examining in detail a particular example, and complaining into the aether (or hopefully the ears of a publisher) about how proper formatting ought to be done. We will finish by making our own book cover along these principles, to show that it can be done lest any use the excuse of prohibitive copyright (which they oughtn’t to, because of the public domain).

Here is a sample of nine such covers for the same book, among hundreds (note that these are all paperbacks, the hardcover appearance is a limitation of my software). Every one of these has problems, but not equally so. I have grouped them into three primary categories. The top three feature photographs. The first doesn’t even appear to have a character from the story (who is this random guy standing by a river? It’s not even the Mississippi). The latter two display prominently whom we are intended to believe is the protagonist. Unfortunately, they don’t look anything like Huck is supposed to look. For instance, he is not blonde. They also do not refer to any particular events of the story. But the real issue with photographs like this is it makes no sense to the subconscious.

Photographs were invented in 1830s France, roughly a decade before the events of the story. It doesn’t make sense to have a color photograph of Huck Finn, posing for a portrait, because such an image could never exist. It would be akin to having a photograph of George Washington on a cover of his biography. Your mind rejects it, because it contextualizes everything you already know about it and sees contradiction. If you were not already familiar with the story, you might not be averse to the design, but since it is an American classic you probably are.

The middle row error is execution rather than concept. As we’ve laid out before, illustration is acceptable for covers. But the quality of these is reprehensible. On the first, there is once again no correlation to events in the actual story. The second two are a classic choice of content—Huck and Jim on the raft—but the center has very odd depth and texture choices that appear as a collage of photograph and digital design (this cover is the edition at the library which prompted this post). The last is a ridiculous cartoon that neither suits the story nor respects the characters. These are simple mistakes to avoid (being a Spanish edition is not an excuse).

The third row is the most forgivable, because the illustrations themselves really are high quality and could belong on good covers. The Dover Thrift edition’s error is the framing design: the blue curve under the title should be removed/replaced with something more fitting with the illustration. The second is almost perfect, but for the awful Papyrus font for the title. The last is also alright, except the title ought to be more prominent than it is. Fixing these, the last three could make decent paperbacks. But even three such is more than you need.

A broader sample of covers for Huckleberry Finn

Why do so many editions need to exist? Well, Huckleberry Finn has been in the public domain since 1940, meaning that legally speaking, absolutely anyone can produce any version of the work they choose to make. Nobody wants the government to start enforcing illustration styles on the covers of books. It’s not that new editions are needed, but that they can be made, and where there is no law and no necessity men do what is right in their own eyes.

There is, perhaps, a case for six editions of any given book.

There are:

• 2 Pricepoints (affordable/high quality)

• 2 Formats (Hardcover/Paperback)

• 2 Contents (original text, text with commentary)

That gives a total of six editions you could possibly need:

	Hardcover	Paperback
Quality Edition	Quality Hardcover	Quality Paperback
Affordable Edition	Affordable Hardcover	Affordable Paperback
Commentary Edition	Commentary Hardcover	Commentary Paperback

For an example of the Quality Hardcover, let’s take a look at the first edition. First published in America in February 1885 (two months after its UK/Canada release), it started with a banger of a cover that has not yet been beat.

The world stands in awe of this majestic work of art. Rarely has anything been so well suited to its medium as this cover. Let’s break it down.

1. Hardcover. Although most books at the time were, this is a major pro that makes several of the next possible.

2. Book Color: Green is the only right choice for a monochrome cover of this book do to the outdoors southern nature of the story. Brown or blue would not do nearly as well, and red would simply be off putting.

3. Creative Text: Although not requisite for a good cover (a plain font will usually do) the text matches the character of the book. Every font is good in its own right, and the various styles correspond well to the rambling style and shifting attention of the book’s namesake. The integration of the fenceboards and trees into the text gives us more insight to the setting and sort of outdoors adventure story it is going to be.

4. Gold leaf: gold leaf hearkens to tradition, lends some gravity to the book, and ties it into the tradition of bookmaking itself. Back in the days of manuscripts and monastic transcription, books were pieces of art often decorated with precious metals.

5. Illustration: The cover provides a picture of the main character, answering many immediate questions about the book. Huckleberry Finn? Who is Huckleberry Finn? Well, you can tell much about him simply from a single portrait. For instance, he’s a) young, b) American, c) Southern, and d) poor. Furthermore, the engraving is an illustration from inside the book itself: in fact, the first edition had 174 illustrations, absent from most modern editions despite their high level of quality.

An enduring principle of design is that things should last. Unless the product itself is made to be physically consumed (e.g. food) everything would be better if reusable. Disposal, particularly single-use disposal but the general wear and tear of anything, is a hurdle to overcome. In the 20th century, significant strides were made toward the longevity of various manufactured goods. While of course better innovation will doubtless make many things obsolete, there is no reason to be seeking the obsolescence of one’s own products by intentional shoddy design. Publishers should be aware of this in their work and seek to make timeless editions of books that could last for generations to come.

Some publishers do at least attempt this. Easton Press is an excellent example of publishing enduring works in an enduring fashion, and at a more affordable price point, Canterbury Classics. It can be done!

For an exercise, I created a mock-up of an improvement to the thrift edition of Huckleberry Finn, using the same basic elements and retaining Dover’s choice of cover art.

This was whipped up in minutes by prompting AI to make particular changes to the Dover Thrift cover, as you can tell by the triple RRR on the spine. I do not endorse the use of AI for actual cover design, this merely demonstrates the ease of fixing the problem.

So if beautifully designed books can be done at any format and price point, then why does so much slop still exist? There are certainly inaccessible reasons for this, which require purpose from the inside of publishing companies, etc. But the appetite for elegant timeless aesthetics has been abandoned by both sides. Consumers can do their part by having more discrimination in their book purchases. Spend a few dollars more to get the nicer edition of a book. Your aim should be building a family library to pass to the next generation, and that thought should be in your mind every time you acquire another book. Will this last? Do I want this to last? You should.