












by SB Sarah • Friday, February 29, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Our candidate for cover snark this week--a Leisure novel released in late January--has left us both speechless.



by SB Sarah • Monday, February 18, 2008 at 11:53 AM
We’ve talked about when bad covers happen to good books, and when good covers happen to books that fail the 30, the 5, and the 1-page test.
Now, it’s a whole new chapter in cover snark: when the same cover happens to multiple books. Thanks to Jane and Barb Ferrer for this faaaabulous samples.
Sarah: She doesn’t look sexy. She looks mean crazy scary. Not insane scary, like she’s going to take off her stiletto heel and drive it into your eyeball, or funny scary when you’re laughing on the out-breath and gasping in fear on the in-breath. Mean crazy scary, where you don’t take your eyes off her while she’s in the same room with you. Regardless of whether she’s representing fictional sex or actual sex, I wouldn’t hit that with a ten foot pole. She looks like she wants to murder dalmation puppies for a full-length coat.
Candy: She doesn’t just look like Cruella De Vil’s hipster daughter. The way she’s holding the underwear like they’re exotic artifacts from an unfamiliar culture or a choice of weapon ("Death by snu snu? Or death by ploot ploot?") gives me the impression she’s some sort of alien from a planet where the sentient life forms look like praying mantises masquerading as a human. She does seem to be a biting-heads-off-while-engaged-in-the-rumpy-pumpy sort.
Sarah: Suspense! Erotica! Nothing says both or either like Jennifer Love Hewitt in magenta. Magenta automatically makes anything, even the Ghost Whimperer, erotically suspenseful. Or suspensefully erotic. Or neither.
Candy: She’s thinking: Is he using Altoids? Or good-old fashioned Lifesavers? I CAN’T TELL.
He’s thinking: Boobs. BOOBS. HOLY SHIT BOOBS.
Sarah: And then there are the cover images and titles that don’t get used nearly enough. A weed-whacked treasure trail and the words “seasonal wind.” There’s so much comedy I can barely breathe.
Candy: Chili season is the unkindest season of all.









by SB Sarah • Tuesday, February 05, 2008 at 08:44 AM
It seems the vast knowledge of the Bitchery when it comes to all things cover art is not a secret, especially among the publishing houses. I received an email from Lauren Naefe, Online Marketing Manager at HarperCollins, who asked if I consult the Oracle of the Bitchery to help settle an in-house debate. It seems the cover art for a particular book is under discussion, and there are two hotly-contested candidates for the coveted position. It’s like deciding the Democratic presidential nomination, only with Bitchery, cussing, and fun! How perfect for SuperTuesday, eh?
The book in question is Confessions of a Beauty Addict, the fiction debut of Nadine Haobsh which comes out November 18. Haobsh is the beauty editor who was outed by New York Post as blogger behind “Jolie In NYC”, a hugely popular blog about all things involving beauty secrets. Her nonfiction advice manual, Beauty Confidential was published in October of ‘07.
The summary of Confessions of a Beauty Addict reads as follows:
When Bella Hunter, Beauty Expert and all around magazine editor wunderkind, loses her job for spilling top industry secrets to Page 6 she thinks her life is over. And, to top it all off, she’s managed to dye her hair bright orange. At her wits end and desperate not to return home with her tail between her legs, Bella accepts a job a Womanly Wear: a magazine her mom reads. But how can she face her glamorous ex-co-workers now that she works in an office where khaki (not Cavalli) is the way of life? Bella is out to wage war on the beauty world one bad makeover at a time, armed with only her Marc Jacobs shoes, three meddling best friends, and a flighty supermodel boyfriend. At odds with her stuffy (and undeniably gorgeous) publisher, Bella begins to realize that she may be fighting the wrong battle.
With that in mind, here are the two covers that the folks at Avon A are battling over. Which do you like? What comments do you have for either one. Lauren has graciously offered 2 advance copies of the book to the two readers who offer the most helpful comment - so speak often and as much as you want.
Sarah: My opinion? Re: the blue cover - which one is the beauty addict? I hope it’s the chihuahua. I appreciate the play on Tiffany blue and the dripping-gem opulence of the creatures featured, but I have no idea what this has to do with the plot. That said, half the cover images of the romances I read have fuck all to do with the plot, so I’m betting this one will win just because cute dog + nice gems = browsers will pick it up to read more.
And as for the pink one, I am pleased the model has paid scrupulous attention to her waxing regimen, given the position of that skirt.
But oy, that font. Right up until the hot pink doodle font I was down with this cover, but man, that font. It’s so corny and jarring and utterly not attractive. I can understand the effort at contrast setting the doodle-font against the groomed couture of the image above it, but man. That font just kills the cover for me. It hurts my feelings. I take that font very personally, and am offended as an American by that font.
So if I pick between Blue and Pink? I go with blue. Even though I like the image of the pink one more, I hate the font so much that it turns me off the cover entirely.
Candy: I like the composition of the blue cover better--it wins on just about every front, from font usage (side note to the people who chose that kuh-ray-zee font for the pink cover: Why didn’t you just use Comic Sans and put us out of our misery? Chrissakes) to the way the faces are framed to the choice of angle to the use of whitespace. If I had any beef with the blue cover, it would be with the use of the chihuahua and the bedecking of said chihuahua with godawful gewgaws. I look at that, and I think “Oh god, another Paris Hilton wannabe.” And really, who wants to associate their heroine with Paris Hilton? Unless being a vacuous coke-snorting trainwreck who provides an instant win on the STD Bingo card is a good thing.
The blue cover (despite the negative associations I have when it comes to over-pampered toy dogs) also wins for me because it looks different. It’s not pink. It’s not some faceless woman (I mean, really, how many chick lit/romance books out there feature some faceless woman’s legs and/or shoes? I love shoes, and God knows I love me some beautiful legs, but enough already). It actually features (parts of) faces, and the faces are fun and interesting. If I were in a store, I wouldn’t stop to look at the pink cover (unless it was to marvel at the rather horrid font), but I’d stop and look at the blue cover.
What’s your verdict?







by SB Sarah • Monday, January 28, 2008 at 07:42 AM
Diane, Viscountess Thrusston, and Kay, Equally Awesome, both sent me big huge ass boxes full of category romance. Seriously, I wanted to find a shrink ray so I could reduce myself by 60% and dive into the box of books and swim around with joy, papercuts be damned. So much reading! In so many various plot options! There’s secret babies, cowboys, sheikhs, private investigators, a late night talkshow host who swears up and down he’s a vampire… I’m so giddy I want to take a week off and do nothing but read old school category romances. There’s even some seriously vintage Betty Neels in there, which I’ve never read before. The women in the cover art have BIG GIANT ANIME-ESQUE EYES and the ends of the pages are red with that dye that totally comes off on my hands. I’m so happy I may plotz. Thank you, Diane! Thank you Kay!
But even better than the vintage way back machine in two boxes of awesome? THE COVERS. It’s not just vintage, it’s veeeentage.
First: a note. I do have a scanner. It’s refusing to speak to my laptop. I imagine they disagreed about where to spend the holidays this year, with his family or hers, but either way, I don’t have the time to sort out their differences so I took really poor digital pictures. Sorry about that. Enjoy my crapass photography.
Ok, this is a really craptastic image - my apologies - but that right there is Janet Evanovich in lime green on an apricot cover that reads, “Naughty Neighbor.” And some manhands and shoulderpads, too, but those aren’t referenced on the cover copy.
Sharon and Tom Curtis?! SWOON! I did a double-take at the image, too - looks like a historical if you only look at her, but then there’s a digital clock radio and a man in some seriously high-waisted jeans on either side of that seriously penis-shaped spotlight.
And speaking of high waisted jeans.... And cute dog!
I know Nora was among the first to write about paranormal shapeshifters, but did she also pioneer the vampire? Because it looks like neither of these two people have a reflection in the mirror behind them.














by SB Sarah • Thursday, January 24, 2008 at 08:15 AM
Gemma sent us the following two covers. In the interest of politeness, I definitely said, “Thank you.” I would not say the same to the art department.
Sarah: Dear Lover England: Apparently I must lie back and think of you, even though I am distracted by the tingling sensation in my womanly parts. Is that normal? Love, your darling Schnookums.
Candy: 65-year-old playboy Humbert England was ecstatic when he snagged what he thought was a nubile 22-year-old playmate...except he found out for himself the advanced state of elective surgery when he discovered not just cobwebs in a Certain Place, but spiders, too.
Sarah: That woman in the middle, Nurse Scratchet, is wondering why these two grinning nimbobs haven’t gotten the message. “The Rose and the Thorn?” The fire in their respective nether parts? What does she have to do, spell it out for them: “YOU PEOPLE HAVE VENERAL DISEASE!”
Candy: Why are there children sitting around a bonfire in these people’s crotches? Seriously. Kids. In people’s crotches. Not cool.
Sarah: “...and the name ‘Rosamund’ will be forever synonymous with mammoth breasts no puffy shirt can hide.”
No wonder the poor thing needs a walking stick. Holy shit.
Candy: Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge...tracts of land.
Sorry for going for the obvious joke, but it’s not as if those bodice puppies are especially subtle.