Ready for another batch of hardcover books seeing a face lift in their paperback form? I swear my list of cover changes grows every time I make one of these posts, too. Alas, here are a handful to take note of. I don’t think there are any bad changes this time, but there are a couple that kind of seem like they’re going after the same thing.

Daniel Kraus’s The Monster Variations has a bit of a killer hardcover look (on the left). I love how you can only make out the shadow of a person in the background, and the way that shadow looms over the entire cover gives the right kind of haunting vibe. Then there’s the car and the headlights in the middle of the shadow guy’s chest — but it’s not just the car and headlights that are noteworthy. It’s the smoke that’s kind of billowing out of the top. I think the deep purple background, which is a little sketchy in and of itself, adds to the dark vibe of the cover. But maybe the thing that works most for me on this cover is the font for the title and the author. I love how thin and jagged it is. I think this cover has pretty great appeal and it gives off just the right tone to the reader about what to expect.

That said, the paperback iteration? It’s not too shabby, either. It takes some of the same elements of the first cover and tweaks them. But rather than one looming guy on the cover, this time we get the shadows of three boys who are walking either toward or away from a pair of headlights. It’s got a dark and gloomy color to it, as well, though the font for the title and the placement has changed quite a bit. But you know what’s neat? It STILL gives off the same tone with the font and how tightly packed together the letters are. It’s interesting, though, how much smaller Kraus’s name became in the paperback edition than it is on the hardcover. Oh, and did you note the addition of a blurb on the front of the paperback from Lauren Myracle?

I’d say both covers work pretty well and have good appeal to a wide range of readers. If I were picking one up, I’d probably go for the hardcover, but I think that’s because it looks just a little bit creepier (and I think it’s a tiny bit more memorable visually). The Monster Variations came out in paperback at the end of October.

Can this hardcover to paperback change for Katherine Longshore’s Gilt get a huge high five? I think this is an excellent change over, especially because the hardcover is so bad. I don’t need to talk too much about what makes it bad — maybe it’s the closeup shot of the girl’s nose? Or the fact she looks dead? Or the fact it makes this historical fiction novel look like a paranormal kind of story with how pale and, well, dead the girl looks? Also, do we need to see up her nose?

The paperback version though gets at the romance and I think it gets at the fact this is a historical romance quite well. I mean, there’s no doubt the girl is quite enjoying that kiss (though if you look too quickly or you are stuck on the fact the hardcover looks like a dead girl, it could look like a guy who is getting a little vampiric on her neck). I’m not usually a huge fan of tag lines, but I think this one — “The price of desire could be her life . . . and the crown” — only adds to the feel of the novel. It’s like this cover gets who the readership of this book is. It’s kind of nice to see the color in this, too; I love that it has a golden tone throughout because that only furthers the tone of a story about royalty. Bonus is that I think this cover has great adult cross-over appeal, as well. This cover is sensual without being outright sexy.

I think it’s neat they kept the title font the same on both and the positioning of the title is identical. The author’s name placement on the bottom for the paperback works a little better for me, too, but I think that might be because it’s in a new color and that color is enhanced by the colors in the image itself. Hands down, the paperback edition of Gilt (due out in May) is a winner. I would wait to buy this book for a collection until May because that cover has much more appeal, particularly for those readers who love historical romance stories, than the nose shot hardcover.

I think I’ve talked about how this book was categorized as taking place in Mississippi on that infographic about books set in the US recently, even though 95% of the book actually takes place in Iowa. It still bothers me because I think the fact it’s set in Iowa is pretty important plot point. Alas.

The hardcover of Jacqueline Woodson’s Beneath a Meth Moon is incredibly simple and poignent because of that. I love how the green is done with the same effect as Kraus’s hardcover above. In this version, I like how the edges are darker than the center, too (we can get metaphoric here if you want to, but I don’t need to lay that out there). The title placement and font are minimalist, though the second “o” in Moon certainly conveys the drug use. This cover is stark and yet it nails home the story quite well. Personally, this is a cover I’d pick up; however, I have a feeling because of how little it tells visually without an actual image, it might be a harder sell to browsers, especially teens.

It’s an interesting shift to the paperback, which now not only has an image, but it’s also a fairly minimalist one. There is a clear sense of despair and challenge with it, given not just the crumbling brick wall, but the way the girl is positioned and in the way the image itself is sketched. It’s imperfect. I dig the use of the light blue color to enhance Woodson’s name, as well as parts of the title. Included on the paperback cover, too, are a nice blurb from the Los Angeles Times, as well as a small listing of Woodson’s honors as a writer.

Now it’s been a while since I’ve read this book, but something I’m kind of wondering about the image in terms of the content — I can’t remember if there is ever a moment in the book where we learn about Laurel’s ethnicity. It’s possible there is, though I don’t remember that being the case. It’s not important to the book itself, but it makes me wonder about the girl on the cover of this book. Is she ambiguous in terms of race? I feel like an argument could be made for that case, and the reason I bring this up is because that would be awesome. It’s a story about drug use, and I love how the cover could further the notion that drug problems aren’t relegated to any type of person (which is what I think Woodson is getting at in the book).

Both covers work for me for different reasons. The paperback edition of Beneath a Meth Moon will be available in February.

Here’s an interesting — and I think positive — change for Annabel Monaghan’s recently-released A Girl Named Digit. The hardcover on the left is fun, lighthearted, and bright. But the problem I have with it is that I think the girl looks really young. I think there is a lot of aging up on YA covers, in that a lot of the models are definitely on the upper range of teenage, if they’re not 20-somethings made to look younger. But this cover, I think the model looks really young, and while that would appeal to a younger reading demographic, I think it detracts older teens from wanting to pick it up. This is hurt by the fact she’s labeled a girl in the title (which is a young term) and the fact her outfit also reads really young.

The paperback, though? I love it. I love how it’s orange and black, which will stand out on a bookshelf because it’s so different. I love that even if it is a stock image, it’s been worked enough to look more like a sketch than a picture. The girl in this image looks much more like an average teen-on-a-book-cover in terms of age, and I feel like her expression is much more teen, too. Since we can’t see what she’s wearing, that only helps. I’m also feeling the way the cover font and title work: I like how it’s all capital letters except for the “i”s. It’s just a little effect and a little different, but it makes the title pop. It’s neat how both covers incorporated digits into the design, keeping the books tied together.

A Girl Named Digit will be out in paperback in May.

Last, here’s a huge change. A huge one. And while I think from the perspective of selling the book it’s a major improvement, from a design and eye-catching perspective, I think it’s a downgrade. On the left is the hardcover for Michaela MacColl’s Prisoners in the Palace, which was subtitled “A Novel of Intrigue and Romance.” I love how it’s like newsprint mixed with a painting. It’s so different, and it’s super bright. It stands out on a shelf. But because of the styling, it looks young. I get the vibe of it being a historical novel but I don’t know if from a reader’s perspective that’s so obvious. It’s pretty gutsy not to have the book’s title on the front, too, I think. But this is the kind of cover you have to see the entire jacket to to understand the effect, so I suggest checking it out. I think what I like most about this cover is that it does not follow any trends in design. It’s unique.

The paperback of McColl’s Prisoners in the Palace will be released in April, and it is much more along the lines of other young adult books in terms of style. It makes use of a stock image of what I presume is a teen girl (it’s hard to tell, of course), and it does so with the sort of golden light that gives the book an aged/historical tone to it. Note that in the paperback edition, the bit about this being a novel of intrigue and romance is no longer part of the title, but it’s instead used more like a burb. I’m not a huge fan of the font choice for the title — it feels a little bit showtime or even a little bit big top for me, but I do think it might situate the book’s content in an era. This isn’t the kind of memorable cover that the hardback is, but it might have more teen appeal.

And is it me, or can you spot a potential nice read alike for MacColl’s book from another paperback edition in this post? I think there is a lot of potential ability to do reader’s advisory by good cover design, and this might be a good example of that.

What do you think? Any of these do it better than another? Am I way off? Have you seen any cover changes lately that have really hit or missed the mark?

Ready for another round of book covers that have or will be changing their appearance when they move from hardcover to paperback? As usual, some of the changes are for the better and some leave quite a bit to be desired.

Meg Rosoff’s There is No Dog came out in hardcover — the one on the left — early this year. I’m pretty into this cover. It’s bright, and I like how the dog is made from the clouds themselves (which is pretty fitting given the book’s topic). The font for both the author’s name and the title are simple, and I think that the slight touches of color with red and white in them make them stand out just enough. The blurb on the front from Anthony Horowitz is simple and to the point. Rosoff doesn’t really need a huge blurb, given her acclaim as a YA author.

In March 2013, there will be a new paperback edition of Roseoff’s title. I think the cover change is interesting. It’s still simplistic, and it’s still bright — even brighter than the hardcover edition. Like the hardcover, the only colors on the cover are red, white, yellow, blue, and black. Primaries with the black and white to contrast. What’s different though is that the last word in the title is in a different font and lives inside the image of the dog. I like the effect quite a bit, actually. But what is maybe most interesting to me in terms of the cover change is that the blurb is different now. Rather than Horowitz’s single word, the blurb is now from People Magazine and a whole two words. I’m not sure whether it’s the case or not, but this cover may be aimed more toward an adult audience than a teen audience. At least that’s the impression I get, given the blurb and the very simplistic look (and interesting to note, at least to me, is the Horowitz blurb almost reads down from YA for me — his books are middle grade in my library).

I think both of these covers are pretty good. If I were to pick one, I’d probably go paperback just because I like the yellow and blue contrast.

On the left is the hardcover rendition of William Richter’s thriller Dark Eyes, which came out earlier this year as well. It’s gotten a number of comparisons to Steig Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo though I haven’t read it and can’t confirm that (and I’m suspicious since I think that’s an easy label to toss on any thriller featuring a female character). The cover is pretty vanilla, and it reminds me of another similar book, though I can’t put my finger on which one because it’s so generic. I am not saying it’s problematic that it’s generic because I think that’s one of the appeal factors for the cover of a thriller like this one, but it doesn’t have much that makes it stand apart, either. One kind of weird thing to me is that the girl’s hands look really big for her body. She has a toughness about her in the way she’s situated, though it looks to me like she’s got something in her eye…other than her hair, that is.

The paperback, due out in February 2013, takes on an entirely different look, despite being just as generic as the hardcover is. It’s a bunch of tall buildings in a city! They’re all tinted in various shades of purple. There is a girl reflecting off the side of one of those buildings, and I think it’s the same girl from the hardcover (or pretty darn close to it). And then, there is that blurb. Can you read it? Do you see who it is from? Pittacus Lore blurbs this book! Pittacus Lore who is a product of the James Frey fiction factor (maybe, maybe not) thought pretty highly of Richter’s work to blurb it. Except this gets me wondering: what does it mean if an author who doesn’t really exist blurbs your book? Could you not get a real blurb? Is it a message about the value of blurbs (that there is none)? Or was this some sort of marketing point for the Pittacus Lore machine? And then I start wondering when I see that blurb if this book isn’t really what it claims to be. Is it a real author who wrote this? So really, the paperback cover here has lost my interest entirely because I’m way more fascinated by this blurb and what the implications of it are.

Neither of those covers quite do it for me, but hardcover might be a little stronger, despite lacking the crucial Pittacus Lore blurb.

It seems like a lot of times when covers go from hardcover to paperback, the change includes the addition of a person. But in the case of Jessica Brody’s My Life Undecided, the switchover goes from using a model to using an object. As far as the hardcover is concerned, it’s nothing mind-boggling. Actually, I’d say it fits the book pretty well. This is mostly lighthearted and the girl on the cover reminds me of the main character pretty well. The way the title and author’s name appear on the cover fits the look of Brody’s first book, The Karma Club.

The paperback is quite different from the hardcover, and I kind of dig it. I love how it’s a mouse, which is extremely fitting for the book itself (which is about a girl who gets all of her life advice via her blog). It’s cute and plays into the lightheartedness of the story itself. What I don’t care for is the curly style of the title font around some of the letters — it’s a small thing, but actually, I really dislike it and can’t stop looking at it.

There’s not really a better cover in this case since I think both play into the content of the book pretty well. It’s curious there was a change, though, especially since the new paperback takes away from the branded-look for Brody’s books that started with her first title. The paperback edition of My Life Undecided will be available November 13.

When this book first came out, the cover image killed me. In fact, it still kills me. Here’s the thing: the cover for The Second Base Club has immense boy appeal, doesn’t it? I mean, that’s a bra made to look like baseballs. However, no boy I know would ever check out a book with a bra on the cover, made to look like baseballs or not. I can pretty safely say the same thing about girls. I mean — putting a bra on the cover of a book just seems like a bad idea, unless it’s romance and aimed at adults, and even then, I can’t say it’s necessarily going to be what draws people to pick up the book. Think about what it looks like to read a book with that cover in public. Especially if you’re a boy. Also, that tag line is pretty terrible. Although it seems to get to the heart of it all.

The paperback edition of The Second Base Club — due out in February 2013 — eliminates the bra issue, but now it brings in a creeper guy. Seriously, the guy is reaching over the girl and she’s definitely not into it. But what scares me a little more is the expression on his face. Is it me or is his head over sized? It looks almost Photoshopped onto the body. As weird as the positioning and the modeling are with the male in this image, the cover itself is much more appealing than the original, and I think it maintains a lot of guy appeal. It sort of reminds me of the covers of the “Carter” series, actually, and I don’t think that is a bad thing. Of interest is the change in tag lines, too. What originally only read “we’re not talking about baseball here” becomes a little more clarified and a little less sexual by adding that the character’s goals aren’t only about baseball.

I think the paperback cover wins this one hands down, though I really dislike the male model and the way he’s definitely taking advantage of the girl who is so not into him. But oh it’s better than that bra cover.

Any opinions about which books have a better hardcover or paperback edition? Anything you love or dislike in any of these? What do you make of the Pittacus Lore blurb? I hope it’s clear I’m not getting over that one for a little while. 

My list of books getting new paperback covers keeps growing, so I thought it was about time to share some of the ones catching my eye, either for good or not so good. This time, I even got one of the authors to give me a little bit of her mind on her book’s redesign.

Dandi Daley MacKall’s The Silence of Murder was the 2012 winner of the Edgar Award. I read it last year and found it unmemorable. What I do remember, though, is really digging the hardcover look, which is on the left. I love the image of the shattered bottle and the stark look of the green against the black background. It’s an exceptionally simple cover but I think it’s effective in not only being eye-catching, but it captures the idea of a mystery. The cover on the right is the paperback look and I think it’s a huge step down from the original. The color scheme is odd, but maybe more odd is the choice to have an illustrated person on the cover. Granted, it’s not a stock image, and while the boy in the hoodie with his mouth covered certainly follows what happens in the story, the cover looks very juvenile. The font, the unrefined lines, and the color scheme make it look very young — I’m especially put off by the almost too-happy color choices of yellow and orange in the tag line (“An Unspeakable Crime. A Voiceless Defendant”) and in the alternating colors in the author’s name. It’s a shame in the change because that original cover is so good. The paperback edition of The Silence of Murder will be released in October.

Apologies in advance for the bit of blur on the paperback cover, but I couldn’t find a full-size image outside the publisher’s catalog. Melissa Walker’s 2011 release, Small Town Sinners, is getting a slight change in look, too. Before I dive in with my thoughts, I asked Melissa what she thought:

I loved the hardcover image on Small Town Sinners — the girl, the apple, the field. I think it’s beautiful. So when I saw the paperback cover, which zooms in on the apple, I had to take a step back. I missed the setting, to be honest. But I also know that the apple is what people talked about when they saw the cover. That heart bite, the arresting red… it definitely catches the eye, and hopefully it will bring more readers to the paperback. 

I’m with her on this one. I really dug the hardcover look, which featured not just the apple, but the girl in the field in the background. There is a lot of symbolism in it, particularly noting the topic at hand in the book. The girl in white, the struggle she feels with following her faith straight and narrow or letting herself to feel around outside it highlighted in the way she shields her face. It is the apple that’s maybe most memorable, though, and I don’t think the paperback gets it wrong by focusing in on it. I’m glad to see the font and design of the title didn’t change in the process; I dig the light cursive for “Small Town” and the contrast in the straight look of “Sinners.” Note that the paperback edition of the book gets a tag line that the hardcover did not: “Does falling in love mean falling out of faith?” I’m not a huge tag line fan, and I think the downside of it here is that it suggests the book focuses more on the romance than on the struggle of faith (and family!) that Walker successfully delves into. Overall, it’s not a bad change, but I wonder what sort of readership this look would bring, as opposed to the original since the change isn’t that drastic. If you haven’t, I highly recommend checking out the entire cover story for the hardcover look over at Melissa’s blog (and if you dig cover posts and aren’t reading her “cover stories” posts, get on it). The paperback edition of Small Town Sinners will be available in January.

Joshua Cohen’s Leverage still makes my stomach turn when I think about it. It’s a hell of a powerful book if even thinking about it looking at the covers makes me hurt. The hardcover on the left is so perfect for this book. The stark look with the arm, vein-y and steroidal, stands out. You know immediately this is going to be a painful book and there is no doubt readers know this book will appeal to male readers and to sports fans. I love the way the font looks for the title — it’s very athletic, very sports jersey looking. I love the white cover a lot and the simplicity really conveys the enormity of the story inside (I know that sounds contradictory, but I think it’s true). The paperback cover, though? Also a real winner. This time, the design offers a greater insight into the fact this is a book that tackles sports head-on, and I love that it looks gritty. Like the original cover, the title design and font choice have that athletic look and I’m glad to see Cohen’s name gets to be even bigger on the paperback. But what I don’t care for? The tag line: “Too much pressure, too many victims — who will take a stand?” It’s so generic and while it does get at the heart of the story, it’s still fairly leading. I think that’s really my issue with tag lines. They force an interpretation of the story on the reader, whether intentional or not. Either way, both covers win in this change up, and I do hope that the new football-inspired look will draw more readers to this intense and gripping novel. Have I mentioned I love this one? Leverage will come out in paperback September 27.

I really liked Carol Lynch Williams’s Glimpse, a gritty verse novel about sisters and family secrets. The original hard cover look on the left stands out to me because of the brightness. Even though it’s a dark novel, I think the way the sun’s light contrasts with the darker woods and the way it’s setting instead of rising gives it that eery feel, that something isn’t quite right. I love that the girl’s face is all there, but it’s obscured enough to show only the look of trepidation and little else. I’m a fan of the way the title is centered and how the font is so narrow, almost whisper-thin, despite being right in the middle of the cover begging for attention. I think that’s fairly representative of the story itself. Of note is that the author’s name is almost buried in the lower right hand corner. The paperback cover isn’t bad, but for me, it’s forgettable. It looks very much like the cover that her latest novel, Waiting, gets in terms of a muted palate. The two girls are looking away from the reader, and I think there is a lot said in the fact the girls aren’t holding one another’s hands or embracing each other. Since this is a sister story, I like that there are two girls; however, the image of one girl in the hardcover is almost more authentic to the story and more haunting. I appreciate, though, how the thin font is still there for the title in paperback and I like how Williams’s name is more prominent. But for me, the winning look is still the hardcover. The paperback is far too generic for me and really reminds me a lot of the Cook redesign I talked about here. Glimpse is available in paperback now.

This is a book I keep meaning to read because it sounds like something that might be up my alley. Marcus Sedgwick’s White Crow cover make over might be one of my favorites — the hard cover on the left does absolutely nothing for me. It’s creepy, but more than anything, it’s just weird to me. The design, with the goth-like face floating above the too-narrow, too-cheap looking title and the random raven (or crow — it could be a crow) just does nothing. I really dislike the font choice for the author’s name too; it looks really old, and not in a good, vintage sort of way. The black-white-red look, which can often make a cover stand out, isn’t effective in capturing any sort of mood for the book. But let’s talk about the paperback. I love how creepy it is. The blue-grey coloring gives a much more haunting feel to it than the black and white look of the hardcover does. More than that though, it’s the girl. She’s got her back to us as readers, and she’s sitting in a simplistic chair in the corner, surrounded with candles. Is she performing some sort of ritual? Channeling the spirits? What the heck is she doing? I love the title font choice, as it’s much more haunting than the original. The paperback reminds me of so many horror film looks, and it draws me in much more because of that. I want to know what the story is here because I know there has to be one. I think it’s interesting that the hardcover look features a person with dark hair and the paperback appears to have a girl with much lighter hair in it. Both feature a pretty lame tag line: “What’s on the other side of death?” but despite being lame, I think the paperback cover draws readers in with those words a little bit more. For me, this is paperback all the way. I’d love that one on my shelf. White Crow will be out in paperback September 18. 

I read Lindsey Leavitt’s Sean Griswold’s Head a while ago, and I remember it being a sweet story about a girl juggling her father’s illness with figuring out who she is amid that stress. There is a little romance in the story which emerges as Peyton engages with her focus object — the back of the head of the boy who sits in front of her. I dig the hardcover look of this book because it’s not only pretty gender neutral, but because we don’t see the boy’s face. Again, it’s a fairly simplistic cover and concept. It’s appealing because, despite being simple, it’s also different enough to stand out. I dig the handwriting font for the title, though I think it is very easy to overlook the author name on this cover. It’s shoved in the corner in a narrow font. The paperback cover, on the right, conveys an entirely different feel than the original. This cover? Romance. This is the cover that will appeal to readers wanting a story with kissing in it (though that plays such a small role in the story that ultimately I think readers might be a little mislead). The couple, though, looks so modern and relatable, I think; these kids are freshmen in any high school right now, no question. There’s a much more feminine feel to the paperback version, and on many levels, it reminds me of the newer looking Lurlene McDaniel books. I think that’s because of how modern the couple appears. I am glad to see Leavitt’s name gets a lot more attention on the paperback, but the title is easy to miss, I think. I wouldn’t say the paperback nor the hardcover does it better. Rather, they aim at two entirely different audiences and I think readers will be drawn to one over the other, depending on what they’re expecting to get from the book. Sean Griswold’s Head will be out in paperback September 18.

Thoughts? Any do it better than others?

I told someone recently I keep a list of books that have had cover changes when they’ve gone from their initial hardcover printings. Although there have been a number of changes in just the last three years I’ve been blogging, there seems to be an even greater number of cover swaps in the last year or so. Even more interesting to me than the cover changes are the pair of books here that got both cover changes and title changes.

Eileen Cook’s Unraveling Isobel (reviewed here by Kim) is getting a cover change that I’m a little bit torn about.  I think the hardcover stands out quite a bit: the color is bright and vibrant, and I like the use of the leafy swirls from the font through the entire image. The cover fits the story quite well, though I find the Photoshopping of the model’s crotch area to be really disturbing (you can’t see it so well in the digital images but it’s visible in the physical copies). This is ultimately a story about mental illness, and I feel like the cover subtly hints at this.

However, one of the things I remember about this book was that there is a notable romance. While it didn’t necessarily work for me, I noted that that would be the sell for many teen readers. The paperback cover knocks it out of the park then, in terms of making it clear there is romance in Cook’s novel. Maybe what I find most interesting, though, is the treatment of title and author in the switch from the hard to paper covers: in the hardcover, the title takes up much more space than the author’s name, whereas in the paperback, the author’s name has much more prominence than the title. In fact, the title almost gets a little lost in the image itself. And although the image is fairly generic, it fits the story.

I don’t know if one cover is better than the other; rather, they seem to appeal to two entirely different readerships. The hardcover seems to appeal to those looking for a non-romantic thriller (which is how the flap copy reads, despite a blurb that calls the book sexy) and the paperback seems to appeal to those looking for a story with romance. The paperback edition of Unraveling Isobel will be available in October.
  

I read John Cusick’s Girl Parts a couple of years ago and was pretty put off by the cover. It’s a story about a boy who suffers from a mental illness whose parents choose to purchase him a companion bot in order to help him deal with the challenges arising from his illness. The companion doll, however, happens to fall for a different boy completely. So while the cover makes sense, there are a couple of problems: first, it’s unabashedly packaging a girl for consumption and the title doesn’t help a whole lot, either. Neither do the stickers on her body that call her “fragile.” Obviously, these make sense because the story is about a companion bot, but the use of a live model rubs me all sorts of wrong. The other problem I have with this cover is that, while this book has strong appeal for male readers, the cover won’t sell it to them. It’s a pretty girl.

The paperback, though, does this book a huge favor while still getting to what the story’s about. The girl is finally gone, and instead, we only have the image of bubble wrap. It’s entirely neutral, which gives it wide reader appeal. The title font is the same as the hardcover, and it works because it gets at the robotic element to the story. One of the big additions to the paperback cover is the tag line, which reads “Can a custom-made girl-bot fill a boy’s needs?” Rather than use the girl on the cover, the tag line does an effective (and much less wince-inducing) job of showing what the book is about. I like this rendition of the cover much better, even if the “fragile” sticker still rubs me wrong — it makes sense, of course, but any time fragile is applied to a book about a girl without agency, I can’t help myself. Girl Parts is available in paperback now. 

Technically, this is a paperback to paperback cover change, rather than a hardcover to paperback switch. You can check out the hardcover edition here (and I’ll say I much prefer both versions of the paperback to the hardcover which bothers me not because it’s risque but because it’s so blank and empty). Although I haven’t read Doing It, I’m pretty familiar with the content of the book, and I think that the original paperback cover on the left hits all the right notes for me. It is awkward. I love that we only get to see the guy and the girl from the waist down, and I think so much it said in the way the guy’s hand lays on the girl’s lap. I also think there’s a lot implied in the way the guy and the girl have their legs in the image. The only thing I don’t care a lot for in the original paperback cover is that it’s a little dark. The colors bleed together a bit: the people blend into the furniture which blends into the background, too. It’s just the title and author that stand out because of their bright color and center-stage placement.

The new paperback — available now — definitely gets rid of the color blending issue. This cover is bright. Despite being remarkably similar to the original paperback cover, the changes are interesting ones. The floor isn’t carpet anymore and the couch isn’t floral but an orange-red. Maybe most noteworthy, though, is that the girl in the image is no longer wearing anything on her legs. They’re bare, and the boy is no longer placing his hand tentatively on her thigh; he’s running it along her leg. His foot is also rubbing against hers. There’s an interesting contrast in the body language between the new paperback and the original, in that the tentativeness and awkwardness of the first seems to have disappeared in the second. Instead, it’s been replaced with more comfort in the situation, at least in the guy’s positioning. The girl in the image still has a hesitance in her body language. I like how the title and author name are treated in this cover, and I think it’s interesting they’ve added a tag line to the newer version: “Everyone’s thinking about it, but are they . . .”

I can’t say I prefer one of the paperback covers better than the other, but I wish I could take elements of the first and combine them with elements of the second to make the perfect version of this cover. I’d love to take the body language of the first and mash it up with the setting of the second. 

I read Mary Jane Beaufrand’s book as The River a couple of years ago, and the mystery woven within the frame of the story of la llorona kept me hooked. It’s also a book I’ve talked to teens and they’ve been drawn to it for the same reasons. For me, the original cover and original title of the book work. I love how there’s so little to it: it’s a few wisps of hair, an image of the water, and the tag line that implies the story is a mystery: “What dark secrets does the river hold?” The colors in the cover work, too. I love the light/dark juxtaposition, as it further alludes to the mystery. What doesn’t work for me is a little thing, and that’s the blurry title font and treatment (it’s less noticeable digitally). Worth noting is that the title is much bigger than the author’s name, which is tiny and shoved in the bottom corner of the cover. It’s a little lost. If there’s something worth noting about the original cover, though, it’s that it looks much more like an adult novel than a YA novel.

This book not only gets a new look in paperback, it gets an entirely new title: Dark River. While this doesn’t sound like a huge change, it is a pretty big one. Even bigger, I think, than the image on the cover being swapped. I always think about cover changes as a librarian, and I can’t help but wonder if the title change will lead to a lot of confusion. I foresee some duplicate purchasing of this book, and I foresee frustration about cataloging in the event of duplicate purchases. That said, I think the new title is a better fit for the story and a better fit for the YA market. The image on the cover of the girl underwater explains it perfectly. I think it’s interesting to note that the title treatment is stronger than in the original hardcover, and the author’s name is much bigger and bolder, right at the top of the book, rather than hidden in the corner. Note, too, the change in the tagline for the story: “What deadly secrets does the river hold?” As a whole, this cover looks much more than a traditional mystery to me than the original. Dark River is available now as a paperback.

I read and raved about Janet Ruth Young’s The Babysitter Murders last year. I don’t think the book got a whole lot of attention, which is part of why I suspect this one is getting a major makeover. The original cover stands out to me because it is so different from most other YA books. The image is really straightforward and there’s little going on in the background. The title is allowed to stand out, and the title sort of indicates what’s going on in the image (the babysitter is there with her charge). What’s sort of uncomfortable about the cover is that this happy picture is then set against the notion of this book being about murder. The font for the title and for the author are also bright and happy. It’s a bizarre contrast, but more than that, the cover looks very much like an adult book cover to me. There’s nothing about it that seems like it would appeal to teens. Even though it stands out, I don’t know if it does so in a way that would reach teens.

Young’s book is not only getting a new cover in paperback, it’s getting an entirely new title: Things I Shouldn’t Think (available in November). Let me start with the easy part, which is the new cover itself. I don’t think it does any favors for the book at all. It’s the same generic girl face with her hair over her eye and nose that seems to be on so many paperback covers, and her expression tells us nothing. In the first cover, the happy image is uncomfortable because of the title, but that uncomfortable feeling works because that’s what the story is ultimately aiming to do to the reader. This one misses so many marks and does little for the book since it looks like everything else out there. As for the title change, though, I am a huge fan. Things I Shouldn’t Think gets right to the heart of the story, which is about a girl struggling with the “C” side of having OCD. What she thinks is what she shouldn’t be thinking. The Babysitter Murders is a tiny bit misleading and I would go so far as to say potentially a spoiler in and of itself. But as much as I like the title change, I dislike the treatment on the cover. I don’t like that it’s not capitalized nor that it’s on a strip of black above the girl’s face. And like the original cover, it’s interesting to note that the author name is tiny, at the bottom, and hard to spot.

Something else worth mentioning about this book’s change is the flap copy. Here’s the original, and here’s the updated version. The first talks around the OCD, while the second hits it head on and uses it as a selling point. I think the second does the book a huge favor in that hitting the mental illness aspect of the book will sell it to readers (which is good, since the new cover is doing no favors). I’m not sure either of these covers are getting the book to the right readers, but I do think the new title is an improvement. Thanks to Courtney for pointing this change out to me.

What are your thoughts? Any of these covers doing it better as a paperback than in a hardcover? What about the title makeovers?

Sometimes I wonder if I spend more time thinking about cover art on books than reading the books themselves. But then I look over at my to-review pile and remind myself it’s all part of the process. Covers are so important to selling books — especially YA books — I can’t help think about how and why they change when they go from their hardcover originals to their paperback incarnations. Here’s a bunch of recent and forthcoming cover changes. Some are good, some are bad, and some don’t elicit much from me at all in terms of being good or bad.

I’ll Be There by Holly Goldberg Sloan is getting a makeover. The original hardcover is on the left and the paperback (due out June 12) is on the right. I think both of these covers are pretty good — the original is illustrated, which is a rare thing to find in a YA cover, and it works well. I’ve read this book, and it’s a quieter novel, and the original cover fits the tone, without overshadowing or overselling the quiet nature of the story. One of the other things I like about this cover is that because it’s illustrated, rather than a stock photo, it will appeal to younger YA readers, and it’s a story that would be appropriate for those just starting in YA books. That’s not to say it’s a gentle or easy read, but rather, it’s inviting.

As much as I like the hardcover, I really like the paperback. It’s a photograph, but there’s something in the muted blue tone that works and makes it stand out. I like the sense of isolation and loneliness the pair of boots has, and it’s nicely contrasted with the monarch butterfly by not only the spot of color, but also the sense of hope it symbolizes. I’m also a fan of the font for the title and author.

Both of the covers for Ruta Sepetys’s Between Shades of Gray are quiet, muted, and almost too easy to look at, since the book is anything but easy to read. I find it interesting that neither of these covers screams historical fiction — they’re both very contemporary looking, and I can’t decide whether that’s a strength (wider readership) or a weakness (missing target readership). The original hardcover (left) is the one I prefer to the paperback for a number of reasons. First, and maybe most importantly, it’s not a photograph of a person. Because this story is so much about human nature, I think the fact it’s a faceless cover is important and a chilling contrast. Not to mention, the nature here fits the setting inside the book. I dig the font treatment on the title and author byline, though her name almost gets lost in the snow on the ground.

I’m not feeling the paperback cover because it features the face on it. Not just any face, but a very pale, very perfect face. More than that, though. there’s something about the way the snowflakes are caught in the girl’s eyelash that bothers me. What I do like about this treatment is the font for the title and the fact the author’s name is bigger and not fading into the image itself. In fact, I think the title font might be smaller than the author’s name even (though it’s a slight difference). It’s interesting that the paperback includes a tag line to it that the hard cover does not that reads “One girl’s voice breaks the silence of history.” I can’t say it’s the greatest or catchiest. For me, the hardcover wins this round.

Kimberly Marcus’s 2011 debut novel-in-verse Exposed does it so much better in hardcover, even though I find the hardcover pretty unmemorable itself. I’ve reviewed this book before and one of the elements running through the story is photography. So as much as I don’t care for the hard cover on the left, it fits the story pretty well, and it’s a nice play on the title. I do appreciate the title font on the hardcover, and how it is spaced out and, well, exposed.

The paperback cover is a downgrade, though. First, it’s a close up of a girl’s face, which tells absolutely nothing about the story. It’s nice it’s a close up of a girl with freckles, since there aren’t a lot of those, but that still tells nothing of the story. But worse: these covers of a close up of a girl’s face all look exactly the same. Maybe it’s helpful in a sense for reader’s advisory or it could be an interesting book display, but I tend to think it’s a little insulting to readers AND the the authors. It’s giving readers the same thing over and over and it’s making the author’s work blend into everything else that’s out there. With the paperback, there was a font change on the title and it’s probably my least-favorite font choice. It’s weak and looks cheap. And maybe the thing that’s most interesting about the change, though it certainly isn’t telling of much, is that the girl on the hardcover version has long, dark hair and the girl in the paperback has blond hair. I guess both girls do have their eyes shut.

Nomansland by Lesley Hauge came out in 2010 in hardcover, and it just released in paperback a couple of months ago, with a cover change. This is an interesting one to look at because both of the covers are really similar — they use the same color palette and both appear to have the same artistic technique of using a stock image and illustrating on top of it (to be fair, I’m not sure if that’s the case or if these are actual illustrations, but I believe it’s the first). In the hardcover on the left, we have the girl shooting her bow and arrow away from the reader. We’ve got no sense of what she’s thinking, though we can tell from her stance she’s strong and determined. The girl is in control of the situation, and it’s clear in the image that the horse is just a tool (and I like that). My one complaint in the girl is that she’s almost made a little too sexy with the way her clothes are sticking/fluttering on her body. That’s not to say she can’t be that way, but it almost feels a little over the top to me, given how much power there is in her stance and in her aim. Note, too, her hair is flying in her face.

In the paperback version, we have the girl facing the reader, and we can read intent in her eyes perfectly. We don’t have a body to judge, but we have a set of eyes and a gaze that gives the same feeling of determination and badassery that the first cover gives. It’s interesting this girl’s hair is flying out of her face, rather than in it, giving the reader an even stronger view of her expression. It’s sort of a refreshing change of pace from the covers with the windswept hair (especially where you know the girl is strong and powerful). I like the font treatment on the paperback cover and I appreciate how the red pops against the otherwise gray and toneless background. I don’t have a favorite between these two covers, but I do think they’re in an interesting conversation with one another.

The cover change on Susane Colasanti’s So Much Closer baffles me beyond words. The hardcover (left) nails the story perfectly. This is a book about a girl who decides she’s giving up her life in New Jersey to move to New York City in hopes of getting with a boy who just moved there himself. It’s very much a New York City novel — the hardcover captures it perfectly, and I think it does a great job of giving a sense of what kind of girl Brooke is. She’s wearing something that screams NYC to me, and seeing that her goal is to be an NYC kind of chick, well, this gets it. More than that, I appreciate the body language going on between the girl and the guy. There’s a hunt of something, the potential for romance to bloom, but there is not a  guarantee. If anything, it sort of illustrates the fact the girl is more interested than the guy (she is, after all, leaning into him and her leg is close to his). I like the font, and I like that the cover is consistent with other Colasanti covers in that her name is bigger and more prominent than the title. This isn’t a knock on the book, but rather, a smart move on the designer’s part, since Colasanti readers often read her books because they’re written by her. Titles are less important than the author.

The paperback cover gives a totally different impression of Brooke than the hardcover: in this instance, she is very much a girly girl. It’s not only because of her dress (which I think makes her look pregnant with the way it’s flying up in the front), but it’s through her entire body language — there’s the stance with her legs, and there’s the way her hair hangs, and maybe the thing standing out to me the most, which is her hands. This cover also plays up the romance much more than it plays up the NYC aspect. I can’t put my finger on what does this — maybe the font of the title and the way it’s laid out — but this cover looks much more like it’s targeting an adult readership than a teen readership. The paperback also features a tag line that reads “Follow your heart . . . No matter where it takes you,” and it fits the theme of the story. I don’t quite get the purpose in changing this cover, though it tells a much different story and gives the book a different slant than the hardcover does. But more importantly, and something I’ve been trying to figure out for a while now: who is holding up the umbrella? From the way her hand is positioned on the boy’s shoulder, there is no way the girl is holding it, unless she has Gumby arms, and from the guy’s position, the same deal holds. Isn’t his head being whacked on the inside by the way it’s positioned? Is there an invisible hand here? An invisible arm? Inquiring minds want to understand the physics behind this one.