Gytsfialodahkjg;wGam.dotgmrod;;dheRf;jslkjdpdkkdoUakkjdnskksmsykjg;raudeBy Its Cover
"You can't judge a book by its cover." That's what they say. But consider: Have you ever picked a book from a shelf, glanced at it, and put it back without a second thought? Then you, too, have fallen into the dreaded, horrid, terrible normalcy of judging books by their covers. Relax. It's no sin, I promise.
In fact, there is an art to snagging the uninformed reader, and it lies almost entirely in the cover of a book. When you are perusing the shelves of your library or bookstore, the first thing you see of any book is the spine, and more importantly, the prominently displayed title. Consider the widely popular book: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." Had it been titled "Little Harry Goes to School", very few people would have taken it from the shelf to begin with, and its smashing success may have been more than slightly dampened, all because of the title. But as it stands, its title is, for many of us, worth a second look. So off the shelf it comes.
Next, and possibly most importantly, comes the second impression... the cover art. Imagine picking up a book to find that the cover was merely a striped pattern done in two very boring shades of blue. Oh, and with the title printed neatly across the middle in black, Times New Roman, size 24 font. Surely that would make you want to open the book! "What new and exciting shades of blue will I find within these pages?" you say. No? Oh.
*Silence... just to make a point.*
To go back to our Harry Potter book, the first thing you see after pulling it off the shelf is the beautifully painted cover by renowned artist Mary Grandpre. If nobody ever judged books by their covers, people like Mary would be out of a job, a waste of talent if you ask me.
After the cover art comes the decisive first line, first page, or possibly the whole first chapter for more picky readers. But none of that would even matter if you hadn't first been compelled to open the book. And with all these thousands of books floating around, how would we ever choose any if we didn't first judge their covers?
Of course, you would point out that the "can't judge a book by its cover" phrase more accurately implies that you "can't judge a book [CORRECTLY] by its cover." And yet, if the author is SO talented that he/she can't string together four or five words interestingly for a title, why should we believe they can hold our interest for an entire novel? Similarly, if the cover art is non-existant, that holds other implications. Is not a single scene in the book worthy of remembrance by illustration? Or maybe the author just doesn't care enough to sketch up a little eye-pleaser for the reader.
So now that you have been enlightened to the fact that you probably do judge every book you see by its cover, whether consciously or subconsciously, I will leave you with this: keep doing it. Judge every book by its cover, and may your intuition lead you through green pastures of enjoyable reading for all of your days. No you may not quote me on that.
posted by T. Stephen Albright @ 2:03 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
you know, if you take off the "beautifully painted" cover to a Harry Potter book... it is just another plain book, with the title embossed on the front. and that is how one would find it in most libraries.
although you have a point, many brilliant authors have decided to leave it to the reader to use their imagination a little. sure, it helps to have a catchy title and some mystical illustration. but in the days before authors had the money, or artistic capability, or perhaps before they had the idea, to decorate the covers of their books, readers would have to just dive into a book, set their preconceived notions aside, and go where the book took them. i mean, i hardly think titles like like "wuthering heights", "jane eyre", "the adventures of huckleberry finn" are particularly interesting. and yet somehow, these are very well-read books, and there are not a great number of educated people that haven't at least heard of any of these books.
all of them have scenes that are "worthy of remembrance", and yet somehow the authors did not find it necessary to capture it by illustration. perhaps they figure that most literate people past the age of 7 do not need a visual play-by-play of events in a book. perhaps they expected their readers to be a little less superficial. and while all of us judge books by their covers (literally and figuratively), that doesn't necessarily mean that it is a good way to select books. the way i usually do it, while it may involve some cover-selection, is i'll read through a few pages. call me old-fashioned, but i like to use my imagination a little. not just my eyes.
p.s. i'm not that opposed to your point of view... i just like to argue.
To Ruthie,
Out of the utmost respect for u and ur opinons, I must ask u to point out any scene from Wuthering Hights that is actually worthy of illustration. :P
anonymous - ummm.... hmm. good point. it wasn't a very good example.
wait wait wait... maybe, like, in one of the first few chapters when lockwood wakes up from his nightmares and pushes his hand through the window, but it's like the ghost hand... and... he rubs the ghost's wrist on the broken glass until the sheets are covered in blood. a little graphic, but semi-interesting, don't you think?
Post a Comment
<< Home