Evolution of a Cover

Here are three versions of the cover for Victor Gischler’s new book GO-GO GIRLS OF THE APOCALYPSE. Which one do you like best? I’ll tell you which one was picked after the jump…

Gogocover_2
Gogoaltcover01
Gogoaltcover02

The publisher picked the first one. I like the other two better…particularly the second one. But I think what they all need is a picture of Dick Van Dyke.

13 thoughts on “Evolution of a Cover”

  1. The black-and-pink is the best one. It not only says “go-go” and “apocalypse,” but it’s got a very attractive level of sophistication and grit that the others don’t.
    So naturally, it doesn’t get picked.

    Reply
  2. I’ve read Victor’s blog, so I already knew the answer, and I think they made the right choice. Not that the other two aren’t very cool, but that first cover’s going to leap off the rack and grab the reader by the eyeballs.

    Reply
  3. I knew the pub would pick the first one because “go-go girls” is lit up like neon by the atomic blast, it really “pops.” But the second one has a gritty post-apocalyptic appeal with its stencil lettering and centered handgun and go-go boots. The red-head in green on the third cover catches the eye but overwhelms the title.

    Reply
  4. In the first one, the title catches my eye more so I can see why that got chosen. The second has a better image but pale colors almost makes me overlook it. The third is just plain yuck.
    PK the Bookeemonster

    Reply
  5. As someone who works with key artists for dvd’s every day, I have to say there are elements of all three that I like. I don’t think any one of them “nails” the title completely.
    I sense a lack of depth or action in every one of them, and with a title Like “Go Go Girls of the Apocalypse” — where’s the whimsy? Why aren’t these “go-go girls” dancing the pony and firing their guns all around?
    I’m a fan of Phil Noto’s art (#3) but there’s no point to the red stripes leading to the landscape. If the landscape were blue then I would get the allusion to America.
    Okay – moot point – but these are the things that float through my cranium when I see commercial art that’s supposed to sell the title.

    Reply
  6. I think focusing on what “pops” is a mistake when what pops is cheesy. I’d notice the title of the first one–and then make a point of not buying it.
    My day job is production art and graphic design in Manhattan. I understand marketing people. All they want is for EVERYTHING ON THE PAGE TO POP! They couldn’t care less whether it tells the right story–all they want is to be mindlessly eye-catching. I suppose that’s because they think the general public is mindless.
    And maybe the general public is.
    But readers?
    That first cover, in my opinion, doesn’t say BUY ME! I’M GREAT. It says LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I’M REALLY LOUD AND NOT VERY GOOD

    Reply
  7. The book comes out in July. While at your favorite local book store, I invite everyone to envision the cover you like best as you reach for your wallet. (Ha.)
    Lee, thanks for posting these. Interesting to get a glimpse of the choices and try to figure which is the best for whatever reasons.
    Victor

    Reply

Leave a Comment