Is it a great cover? I'm in a...
…State of Denial:
In Bob Woodward’s highly anticipated new book, “State of Denial,” President Bush emerges as a passive, impatient, sophomoric and intellectually incurious leader, presiding over a grossly dysfunctional war cabinet and given to an almost religious certainty that makes him disinclined to rethink or re-evaluate decisions he has made about the war. It’s a portrait that stands in stark contrast to the laudatory one Mr. Woodward drew in “Bush at War,” his 2002 book, which depicted the president — in terms that the White House press office itself has purveyed — as a judicious, resolute leader, blessed with the “vision thing” his father was accused of lacking and firmly in control of the ship of state.
As this new book’s title indicates, Mr. Woodward now sees Mr. Bush as a president who lives in a state of willful denial […].
From the Times’ Book Review, but it was hard to go to any news outlet this weekend and not read about it. But let’s set the politics aside — as much as possible — and talk about the cover.
Is it effective? Yes. Likely to be quickly spotted on a shelf? Yes. Hot because of the news? Yes. Great? Not sure.
One of those titles, I guess, where the publicity is enough to not require an amazing cover. But here’s the rub: I’m not sure how I would make this an amazing cover. What a title to design for!
What would you do differently? Why? Or, give this cover some love. Leave a comment.
Note: I’m neck deep in projects and will moderate the comments as often as I can — likely early afternoon and then again in the early and late evening. Thanks for your understanding — and comments!
Comments:
Maybe a photo of George W. Bush Jr. from behind, the head a bit turned, like if he just said “I don’t want to know anything about it”.
Maybe so the weight of the title “falls” on him.
Clearly no thought was put into this. They didn’t even bother to kern. Look at the NI and the WA. The type in caps is nasty. The margins are chokingly tight. Oh, and red, white, and blue—surprise!
This cover is garbage.
I’m grumpy.
Yeah Fran, or maybe the three “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” monkeys set below the title?
Just an Iraqi landscape, US forces jeep, burnt to a crisp smoking in the distance.
Maybe Bush and Rumsfeld together, looking happy.
This being the third in a three-part series of books, I would have designed the cover to match or look similar to the first two. But maybe that’s just me.
April, since the third book is such a departure from the first two, is a departure in design not a good idea? (Just asking, not asserting.)
Dan, I’d vote for “smug” over happy, and along Jon’s line of thinking, perhaps some metaphorical approach. Gotta have Cheney if you’re going down that road, though…!
Juan, that was similar to my first reaction — perhaps even one of the earlier covers reinterpreted with a darker eye (i.e. not through rose color glasses)?
Brian — I feel your pain re: grumpy. It’s 7:15am and I haven’t been to bed yet!
Thank you all.
P.S. Meant to mention: Did everyone notice that the alternate title was Crisis?
It’s black and white and red all over.
R/
Giles, very good point! :) But I really think the design is too much of a departure. The book is a different look at the same people, same topic, and yet if it were not for the subtitle, I would never have lumped it in with the first two books. I just don’t get a sense that the three are part of the same series — the second book doesn’t even refer to the first in a subtitle, like this third one does. I mean, if the books are going to be so individually designed and titled, why not throw the Mark Felt and Watergate books into the series as well. ‘Twould make just as much sense. In other words, not at all.
I would go for something literal, like black “censor” bars worked into the typeface. Perhaps three thick black bars over what is presently the title space, with an asterisk. Then the full title as a footnote at the bottom of the page. Going further, you could even make it look like it’s written on official White House stationary. Probably too gimmicky for a political work, though, I wouldn’t be surprised if the publisher wanted maximum visibility at a compromise to something more visually intelligent.
Where is Den Ial? Sorry, cheap shot at the poor kerning.
Anyone know the name of the typeface?
i agree, it’s a see-it-from-anywhere-in-the-store-if-you-know-what-you’re-looking-for cover. effective. no aesthetics whatsoever.
but i must say that it delights me no end to see a cover criticized on account of bad kerning!!!