Well, not to contradict pnh, whose word seems pretty authoritative, but I'd take B&N's dataset with a grain of salt. That is, it may only suggest that this is what B&N has found works, within the assumptions they've made and industry practices they've established. Obviously I have no data contradicting it, but I haven't seen any attempt by Waldenbooks, say, to determine what characteristics are making customers buy the books they do. That is, they've never asked me. (I, obviously, am the last word on customer preferences.)
I'd tell them that the cover factors in very little for deciding to buy books or authors I don't know. (I admit I don't read romances.) Title a bit (the less cliche'd, the better), blurb about the central shtick even more, but those two I can entirely forget about if when I flip it open and read the first page or a page at random, the writing simply sucks me in. I may, though, simply be less ruined by TV less visually oriented than many people.
I certainly don't object to there being a dragon on the cover if there's a dragon in the story, or that the dragon is gaudy, or even if the dragon's, or anyone's, appearance doesn't match the description in the story. If it's a historical, I don't require accuracy in period clothing. It would simply be a lot to coordinate, it seems to me.
It's the fact that a heroine who fights with a sword, in ellen_kushner's upcoming The Privilege of the Sword was shown on the cover with unbound hair flowing to her knees. (Oh, no, tripping on it is no problem in a fight.) Or the fact that sometimes the cover doesn't appear to relate to the story at all, like marthawells's The Element of Fire.
The things you're asked to suspend your disbelief about in a work of fiction usually seem to be presented early. Which is why, I'm told, you can't establish that magic exists, two-thirds of the way into the story. (That very sin, for example, ruined the movie The Green Mile for me.) And for me, anyway, it's possible to be asked to believe too much. I guess my view is only that it doesn't help when the cover sets off your bullshit detector before you even start; for me, it leaves less "belief" currency for the writer to spend.
But I suppose I'm a minority, that way, at least according to industry practice and research. :-)
no subject
I'd tell them that the cover factors in very little for deciding to buy books or authors I don't know. (I admit I don't read romances.) Title a bit (the less cliche'd, the better), blurb about the central shtick even more, but those two I can entirely forget about if when I flip it open and read the first page or a page at random, the writing simply sucks me in. I may, though, simply be
less ruined by TVless visually oriented than many people.I certainly don't object to there being a dragon on the cover if there's a dragon in the story, or that the dragon is gaudy, or even if the dragon's, or anyone's, appearance doesn't match the description in the story. If it's a historical, I don't require accuracy in period clothing. It would simply be a lot to coordinate, it seems to me.
It's the fact that a heroine who fights with a sword, in
The things you're asked to suspend your disbelief about in a work of fiction usually seem to be presented early. Which is why, I'm told, you can't establish that magic exists, two-thirds of the way into the story. (That very sin, for example, ruined the movie The Green Mile for me.) And for me, anyway, it's possible to be asked to believe too much. I guess my view is only that it doesn't help when the cover sets off your bullshit detector before you even start; for me, it leaves less "belief" currency for the writer to spend.
But I suppose I'm a minority, that way, at least according to industry practice and research. :-)