Welcome to BOLD discussions. Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments. It’s never too late to participate; whether it be an old discussion or a new one, tell me what you think.
Let’s talk about cover changes this week. Or rather, let’s talk about a specific kind of cover change: the one where publishers are trying to reach “a broader audience/new readers”.
I understand that this is the reason for practically every single cover change ever, but I think that publishers should be straight forward when they mean to say, “We are changing these covers because we don’t want boys to feel embarrassed reading them.”
Let’s face it: it seems like more and more covers these days are getting a makeover to try and reach out to a male audience.
On the one hand, I think this is great. I love the idea of getting more people to read YA.
But on the other hand, I get pretty upset. Here’s why: when covers are changed to “reach a new audience” *cough, cough, boys* they are reinforcing the idea that boys should be embarrassed to be caught reading books with girls on the cover.
Why don’t girls deserve books with thought out covers instead of the sometimes sickeningly cliché ones that are produced? And, more importantly, why is it more acceptable for a girl to be reading a book with a boy on a cover than a boy reading about a girl?
I am far from being the first one to ask these things. In fact, Maureen Johnson made a somewhat similar point pretty effectively with her Coverflip idea.
Let’s take a look at some examples of cover changes.
Here the covers change from sci-fi covers with romance to stone cold sci-fi. I really love the first set of covers, though the second set isn’t that bad. But, I have the distinct feeling that the covers on these books were changed so that boys would feel inspired to give this series a shot. Again, I am all for boys, or anyone, reading YA, but it reinforces those earlier problems I mentioned earlier.
Another example.
Again, we see the cover going from one featuring a girl to a more gender neutral cover. (I have to say, I do like this cover change because that first book just looks like so many other covers.)
Those are just two quick examples of cover changes that came to mind. I really like both series, but I feel like there cover changes carry some extra baggage.
I guess another one of my biggest questions is why aren’t these covers re-evaluated from the start? By releasing a first feminine cover and then later a more masculine one, it seems to be telling me that publishers are trying to appeal to two different audiences at the same time. If this wasn’t the case, why wouldn’t they just release a gender neutral cover from the start? By doing the changes, I get the feeling that boys aren’t going to read girl books, so instead of working to change this idea they are simply reinforcing it.
Congrats for making it to the bottom of this discussion! What do you think? Is there any truth to my words or am I just talking nonsense? Are there any other cover changes you think reinforce my point? Let me know!
In Italics 
Kim @ The Nomadic Book Hoarder
I really hate cover changes. I want my books to match and I don’t have the money to just buy the redesign to replace my old copy. I actually have that problem with the Across the Universe series. I own the first book with the old cover and both of the sequels in the redesigned version.
I agree with you that most of the redesigns happened because the publishers wanted it to appeal to boys. I understand that, but I don’t understand why they made a more female orientated cover in the first place. Like, they must know beforehand that their target group is both males and females. WHY don’t they then design a cover that appeals to both the first time the book is released?!
Arial at In Italics
I love having matching covers so much. The Across the Universe cover changes were the hardest for me to accept since both original covers were so pretty.
I don’t get why they make the female-oriented cover in the first place either. You worded that in one sentence what I was pretty much trying to convey in a whole post. If they know that the first cover is going to alienate boys, why diid they take the time and money to publish it? I guess I just do not understand the world of book marketing.
Jasmine @ Flip That Page
Well this is a fine post! I have definitely thought about why they change covers, but now that you’ve established the idea of changing them to make them more ‘gender neutral’, and that is to say, appeal to men (most of the time!), now I think I’ve shed light onto ideas of my own. I guess you’re right in asking why they don’t just making it gender neutral from the beginning, but if I look at it from my perspective, I would NOT want them to do that. Because honestly? Most of the more masculine covers aren’t nearly as gorgeous as the more feminine ones, because let’s face it! I’m a girl, and girlier things, so to speak, would appeal to me more. And since the YA audience is massively female (I mean, look at the people who blog about these books!) it’s likely a marketing strategy of sorts to make covers appeal to girls, because though it’s cliche, many of us are cover judgers ( I know I am!) But then of course, they wouldn’t want to alienate the boys so they make more boy-friendly covers 😀 And I guess you could ask why it’s okay for girls to read about books with boys on covers, but not the other way around, but that’s just how society works sometimes. If a girl reads a book with a boy people go ‘Oh, she’s just swooning over him’, and it goes okay. But if a boy reads with a girl on the cover, people go ‘Oh man, that’s so gay’, which is taboo, I know, but let’s be honest! That would honestly be my first thought too (guilty). So there! I hope I answered the question, and sorry for the essay-comment 😦
Arial at In Italics
Thanks! You definitely have some good points. I am a total cover judger too, so I know what you mean about liking the more feminine covers more than the redesigns. It does make sense to appeal to the feminine crowd, since we are the majority of YA readers. I guess I just don’t understand why they do this especially in the middle of the series. Thanks for taking the time to answer all of my crazy questions. I think you have some pretty valid points, especially like how females dominate the YA market. And I always love getting essay-comments, so don’t worry! 🙂
Nikki (@thepapersea)
Hear, hear! Between yours and Maureen Johnson’s Coverflip post, I don’t have a lot to add to the discussion, apart from the iterate that you’re not talking nonsense and this is a real issue that needs to be discussed and rectified in the publishing world.
There are really two sides to look at this from, both of which are problematic:
Firstly, that ‘girl’ books get all the clichéd covers — lots of pink, lots of kissing, lots of swoon-worthy boys, even when that doesn’t accurately represent the plot of the book. Because all women are reduced to hearts and roses, amirite?
Secondly, that boys should be embarrassed to read ‘girl’ books because god forbid that pink background and the picture of that boy and girl kissing turns them into something horrible! Like someone who is homosexual! (Seriously. I’ve seen people convinced that a boy who reads about a heterosexual couple in love will make him gay. What.)
I’m not sure the fix-all option would be to release a gender-neutral cover. I mean, if the book is a romance, then a cover with romantic elements is going to accurately represent the book. In this case, the fix would be to overcome the prejudice that boys shouldn’t like girly things like romance. But in the case of books getting a cliché ‘girl’ cover, then the fix would be to, well, not make a cliché ‘girl’ cover, instead choosing one that more accurately represents the book.
It’s such a convoluted problem and it makes me so angry! There isn’t going to be a quick fix for it, but I’m disappointed that it doesn’t get more discussion and acknowledgement from publishers.
Arial at In Italics
It makes me so glad to hear that others think this is a problem too and not just something that needs to be accepted.
I completely agree with you that almost no matter the content of the book, if it is about a woman, or a teenage girl, it is going to be marketed with lots of hearts, lots of pink, and lots of dramatics. Sometimes, I do like the more feminine covers of a book, but other times it makes me upset to think that people expect nothing more from young women than things considered inconsequential.
It is so incredibly disheartening to know that I could read a book with a couple on the cover and not really receive much judgement, but if a boy did the same thing people would be convinced of certain things about him. It is really harmful to both boys and girls. (That is definitely one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. Like, a) why would it turn males homosexual in the first place and b) why wouldn’t it do the same to women? Utter rubbish.)
I definitely agree on that front. I am sure I cam across as promoting only gender-neutral covers, but really, I just want the cover to actually reflect the message of the book. I don’t want to be tricked into thinking a book is something different than what it is.
I wish that more publishers would speak up about this instead of just silently going along with it. It makes me both sad and angry, as well as extremely disappointed. I recognize that it will take more than just YA book covers to radically change our views, but it would still be nice to see even a little bit of change.
Kayla Sanchez
*not going on a rant about sexism* *not going on a rant about sexism*
Okay okay to the actual point of the post. Why did they change the Across the Universe books??? I wouldn’t even pick up the second set of those covers. They’re not awful, but put next to the old ones, they can’t even come close to comparing.
I think the worst part about cover changes is when it happens mid-series. That is the absolute worst thing ever because then I know that I’ll have to spend the extra money to make my set match but then there’s a possibility of having mixed hardcovers and paperbacks. Like with the Shatter Me series – when Ignite Me comes out, I will probably cry if there isn’t a boxed set with the hardbacks and Shatter Me with the new eye cover.
And now I’ve gone on my own rant so I’ll stop now. But yes – use a gender neutral cover from the start if you’re trying to aim for boys and girls.
Arial at In Italics
I wrote this post knowing that it was going to end up being a rant. I didn’t even want to get started on the issue of whitewashing on covers because then we would be hear all day.
Exactly! The first set of covers were so beautiful and colorful, and the new ones, while not bad, certainly pale in comparison to the first set.
I agree. I hate when my covers don’t match on my shelf because then it’s all I can see. I still can’t make up my mind whether or not I like the Shatter Me covers. The cyclops eye is kind of odd. But, I think I read somewhere that at the moment there is no plan to print hardbacks of SM with the new eye cover. Fingers crossed though that they change their mind.
I think there is an argument here for gender neutral covers from the start, or at least helping boys to learn that there is no such thing as a “girl book”.
Chiara @ Books for a Delicate Eternity
I definitely agree with you.
For instance, a few weeks ago, I was reading what could be called ‘a guy book’. There were no female characters, the author was male, and the man character was male. The cover was completely black with silver text, and a picture of a dude on it. I actually adore the cover, and it is one of the reasons why I read it. But it might not appeal to some girls who are drawn to the more pretty covers that can be released.
But then there’s what you said: why aren’t publishers making book covers gender neutral from the start? The book I was reading was about inhumane experiments, so there could have easily been a lab or something on the cover, so as not to denote it as a ‘boy’ book from the moment you see it.
Take The Hunger Games books, for example. Female MC, targeted audience: both genders. The covers for those books are awesome. The ones I read just had motifs on the front cover of the mockingjay in various poses. Both males and females are comfortable with motifs, right?
But then, the Divergent books were released in Australia with a girl. On every single cover. Dudes aren’t going to feel entirely comfortable reading a book with a girl on the cover. And yet, the US versions of those books had the gender neutral motifs again. Why did they change it for Australia? It seriously does not make any sense to me, and actually limits the readership substantially.
BUT. I must say that the original covers of the Across the Universe books are so much more appealing. I really do not like the second ones. At all. Surely it doesn’t have to be ugly to appeal to both sexes? Sigh. And why didn’t they at least release the last book in both covers? I mean, people bought the first two and some (like me) must have matching covers for all books in a series. URGH.
Arial at In Italics
I think as long as the cover fits the book, I can be happy. The problem isn’t that we need more gender neutral covers, but that we need covers that better represent the books. For example, with the book you are reading about inhumane experiment, if a woman wrote it, chances are it would have had a female on the cover and thus not have been a good representation of the book.
I really think the HG cover designers were brilliant. They realized that the book would be enjoyable for more than just teenage girls, so they put a cover that accurately represented the book. The cover did a great job of what it’s supposed to do: sell the book.
I think it is interesting to see how different countries handle cover designs. I think that the US covers might have been a little smarter because they took an approach similar to the HG in that they recognized the target audience of the book and put on a cover that was marketable to both genders. I think that the Australian covers still fit the books since it is about a girl, but I do see your point in how it could have kept with the symbol theme and been more marketable to boys and girls.
I seriously think it was a bad idea to change the covers mid-series, especially when the original covers were gorgeous. I’m glad that you liked the original better too. It is aggravating that a lot of the covers designed at both genders are typically more plain and kind of ugly. I feel your pain about covers changing mid-series. I need the covers to match on my shelf, and I would have really appreciated it if the change happened only in the paperback versions.
alice-jane
Sometimes I like cover changes, like Stephanie Perkins’ Lola and the Boy Next Door and Anna and the French Kiss but I am not a fan of these. The gender-neutral covers kinda kill it for me and I feel like the gender-neutral books make the books more masculine than they actually are (but really what are these gender-confining words/covers anyway?). The intended audience for books should be genderless and we need to work towards changing beliefs, instead of just targeting one perceived gender from the start.
I guess the reason why publishers may go through with these is because they look at the initial success of the books and see that the buyers are mostly female (I’m assuming, but idk for sure). Since publishing is a business after all, they probably want to maximize profit by going after the other gender they think they’re isolating.
Arial at In Italics
The Stephanie Perkins’ covers do look really nice now that they have been remade. The books are more than a flippant contemporary romance, and the original covers don’t really convey that like the text-oriented ones do. You raise a really good point about how the gender neutral covers make the books more masculine seeming. For example, taking a girl off the cover of a book makes it more masculine-like, but doesn’t change the fact that the book is still about a girl. (I have to wonder if I am also falling into the trap of calling covers gendered, but I honestly believe they are and that it is ignorant to pretend they aren’t.) I completely agree that the audience should be genderless from the start.
I definitely think that the publishers do see that a primarily female audience has bought the first wave of books, so they then publish a different cover to appeal to the audience they have missed. It can be hard to forget that covers are really a sort of advertising, and so apply to marketing practices more than anything else.
Pingback: Bookish Recap: December 29th – January 4th | A Bookish Heart
Pingback: Weekly Wrap-Up (#18) |
Pingback: January Wrap Up | Lose Time ReadingLose Time Reading
Pingback: Weekly Recap: December 29 — January 4 » The Paper Sea