If you didn't already know this, I am a book fan and when I say books I mean real things that you can carry in your hand. I do not think I will ever be seen with a kindle,nook, or any other type of reading device. I am still stubbornly refusing to take part in this latest technological trend. Now don't get me wrong I can see why these little devices might appeal to some people, they just don't to me considering I hate the idea of not owning tangible books. Maybe someday I'll own one, but that will be in the very late future.
As for books, I have noticed a few things regarding them lately because I am a loser and pick up on stuff like this;
1. Teen fiction- I was at Target a few weeks ago and at Barnes&Noble the other day when I noticed this. Why in the world are all of the freaking book covers the color black? Why can't we have the book cover be sparkly and pink, would it literally kill someone to do that? Do we have to follow the stupid vampire example and make every book look like a depressing graveyard? No, I don't think we do.
Oh and paranormal romance is considered to be a book category now.
2. Speaking of horrible vampire books, these are not, nor will they ever be acceptable book covers for two of the greatest classics of all time. Classic literature should be able to sell just fine without the influence of overrated teen vampire romance.
I know the old saying, don't judge a book by it's cover but I am judging. I am judging hard. Most of us base a book on it's cover anyways, most of us would hate to become blind because then we wouldn't be able to SEE things. This is an insult to Emily Bronte, Jane Austen, and Shakespeare. Romeo and Juliet is considered a tragedy, not a romance! None of the above stories have to do with freaking flowers or "the dark ages" which I am assuming these covers were trying to go for.
Oh and my two favorites:
Do not screw with Jane Eyre. WTF is this? NONE of the female characters in Charlotte Bronte's classic look like the red lipped female shown above unless they are trying to resemble Helen Burns but even that doesn't make since considering the red nail polish! Jane was a governess in 19th century England there is absolutely no way Mr. Rochester would have let her saty at his house (Thornfield) if she was wearing makeup like that and had her nails that color. And again, what up with the flowers. Exactly what are they supposed to represent? They certainly don't represent any of the characters and not once in this book does a scene like this happen;
Rochester: Jane I hath loved you like a little rose. Speaking of a rose I picked a red rose out of the garden for you to wear in your hair like all governesses should. You are my red rose. I like flowers, especially roses because they remind me of you! Now Rose, please take this flower and accept my marriage proposal.
Jane: Eeee! Of course I'll marry you!!!
... forgive me Charlotte Bronte. But seriously I might break someones face if that is what they think Jane Eyre is truly like.
Now I am all for teens getting into the classics and if these covers help them do that then so be it. But I also think that the cover art should somehow be a compliment to the text inside the book and these all just don't do that.
3. I do not understand the craze with Abraham Lincoln lately. Now I can't give a detailed opinion on any of these because I haven't read them, but why are people turning the16th president of the USA into everything they can possibly think of. Vampire hunter. Zombie slayer. Ghost. Now from what I know Abe was a pretty cool president but I just do not see how any person could come up with the idea of turning him into a vampire hunter. It's genius really. Or insanity. I truly liked Pride&Prejudice and Zombies by the same author so I don't think the idea of the dude on our $5 bill being a vampire hunter can be as insane as it sounds.