I have a cover reveal organised by the fantabulous Lola from http://www.lolasblogtours.net, and following a post https://slashingpax.wordpress.com/2016/04/02/i-love-weaklings from the equally fantabulous Ingela, I thought I’d share my view on covers, mainly a certain type of cover. This one:
The hunky bare chested male, by himself.
In my genre, this type of cover is rife. You can’t browse the modern romance section without ending on the picture of a ripped, sometimes tattooed chest and a six pack. The pose is usually sexy, the lighting slightly porny, and the background blurry.
Now don’t get me wrong. I like ogling on handsome men as much as the next girl (mwhahaha!), but the rampant use of yet another taut stomach’s close up is starting to bore me to tears. I know I may be wrong, but to me, it indicates a lack of imagination from the author/publisher who chooses this type of cover, which doesn’t bode well for their plot.
It’s like the romantic interest wasn’t very compelling, and not worthy to be shown. I know that romance readers are mostly women, so it explains the abused broad chested male cover. Yet I’m not sure if those women are genuinely swooning at every single one, or if the publishers think they do. I am not going to discard a book for such a cover, but it loses some brownie points from the start, and the blurb will have to be twice as appealing.
Give me an original cover. One where both the protagonists show up. After all, it takes two to make a romantic couple. Fully dressed, half dressed, I don’t care. Don’t put them in a corny pose circa 1980’s Harlequin with flowing hair and open shirt. Show me the mood of the book through colour, light and facial expressions, because a picture is worth a thousand words and it will pick my curiosity.
Or don’t show the characters at all, because it pushes the sub-genre to the surface and I can let my imagination flow.
What’s your favourite style of cover?