Fugly Covers

I talked awhile back about how friends don't let friends use ugly book covers, because at least then, oftentimes, the author has some control over what the cover will look like. I even showed an example here of where I commissioned a cover which was hideous and promptly made the decision never to show anyone (which I eventually broke because I wanted to prove that I do as I say). But what about when you're just a contributor to an anthology or journal? Obviously you have no say whatsoever on what the cover will be. We get in that position, at one time or another, where we have a story accepted and we get really excited and we wait months and months for the anthology or journal to be released, and then the cover is announced and it is ... not-so-great. No, not-so-great doesn't even begin to describe what's wrong with the cover. Simply put, it's fugly (a term I haven't heard used in awhile and which I want to bring back into the mainstream). And what, then, are you the author supposed to do? Well there really isn't much you can do unless you want to piss the editor off and try to withdraw the story (and if the anthology or journal is already published, then you're SOL). This is why I think it would be great if editors posted the cover art way in advance, so writers know what they're getting into when they submit. Otherwise they go in blindly and could end up with a fugly cover (sure, sometimes the covers can be great, too). Except, you know, that will never happen. But still, wouldn't it be nice and save many of us a lot of time and effort? (Where is this post coming from? I recently saw a very fugly cover to an anthology I had actually submitted to. I was rejected, thankfully, because had I been accepted it would have pained me to announce the anthology's release here on this site. I mean, seriously, I feel like a dodged a bullet on that one, folks.)

On a completely unrelated note, anyone else think this movie is a complete rip-off of Kick Ass?