|
About This Author
I am SoCalScribe. This is my InkSpot.
|
Blogocentric Formulations #809678 added March 10, 2014 at 10:26pm
Restrictions: None
Cover Art & Up In The Air
PROMPT: I recently rediscovered the usefulness of the library ( ) even after working here all year, and began looking more and more in depth at the covers of books. What book are you reading now? If you aren't currently reading a book, what is the next book you want to read, or what is the last book you finished? What drew you to that book? Look specifically at the cover design, the back cover, and the inside flaps. What makes this book one that would stand out on a library shelf?
I can answer all those questions!  The two books I just finished reading are:
The book I'm currently reading now is:
And the book I'm reading next will either be:
To be honest, the cover art on a book is not really a consideration for me when I'm deciding what to read. I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that I'm either reading ebook versions of a title, or listening to them on audio. I'm definitely drawn to interesting artwork if I'm browsing at a bookstore, but I don't think I've ever purchased a book based on the image on the cover.
I read a lot of books every year, and almost all of them are either based on recommendations of someone who's taste I trust, or are something where the synopsis or quick summary of the premise has caught my interest. I do like the simple artwork on the Hunger Games trilogy books; something simple and classic like that is definitely something I'd look for if I were, say, collecting hard copies to add to my library or something like that. I absolutely hate the "romance" type covers where it's supposed to depict a scene from the book and it's characters embracing, or looking longingly at one another. I'm far more interested in stuff that piques my curiosity, leaves a little mystery, and makes me wonder how it's related to the narrative between the front and back cover.
I think some of my favorite covers in recent memory... ones that didn't convince me to read the book but did look quite nice sitting on my shelf at any rate, were Joe Abercrombie's First Law trilogy in paperback:
and the Divergent trilogy (the non-movie tie-in versions):
In both cases, the covers are visually interesting and make you wonder what the books are about, without spoiling too much. If I'm ever fortunate enough to get a book published, I would definitely want something along these lines, that makes people take notice and wonder what's going on. And I love tie-ins like the fact that the Divergent books all have one of the faction symbols on the cover (except for Allegiant which is something else), and the fact that there are hidden clues in the hardcover design of The Da Vinci Code. Give me that over a seductive picture of a couple holding each other, or a fantasy nomad surveying a landscape, or a menacing picture of a partially-obscured monster any day. 
--------------------------------------------------
PROMPT: What's the best adaptation of a book (or book series) you've seen?
Simply put, I picked this movie because it's one of the few times where I think the movie was an improvement over the book. There are ample examples of movies that don't live up to the book, or deviate from the book with disappointing results... and this was one of the few experiences where I felt like the movie added a whole layer that the book didn't even begin to scratch. For those who haven't read Walter Kirn's book, there was absolutely nothing in the novel about Anna Kendrick's character. The thing that made the movie so endearing, for me, was her character's relationship to George Clooney, both what she brought out in him, and what he brought out in her. Without her character, the book felt somehow flatter and less interesting. Ryan (Clooney's character) was more self-involved and less endearing; the book was a story about a lonely man's solitary life rather than the movie being a story about a lonely man's discovery of what's important.
If you're interested in comparing the two, the book is interesting to read in terms of a compare-and-contrast activity. But if you haven't seen either, I highly recommend the movie over the book. It's a much more engaging, touching, and affirming commentary on the world than the book is. I don't often claim a movie is better than a book (hardly ever, really), but this is one of those times where I wholeheartedly think that's the case. And the fact that Jason Reitman didn't win the Oscar for Adapted Screenplay that year was, in my opinion, one of the biggest slights in Academy Awards history. The man took a somewhat bland, unemotional, detached book and gave it a heart and soul on the screen. It's the very definition of a brilliant adaptation.
|
© Copyright 2014 Jeff (UN: jeff at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Jeff has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work. |
