Why would you copy such an iconic cover to use on a novel-- or s book of short stories? That just doesn't seem right to me.
I, too, am baffled. When a publisher makes the decision to use an iconic image--especially one so closely associated with a particular book--what is the reason? Is it laziness? The desire to piggy-back on the success of the original book? The expectation that people will buy one thing thinking it's another? Whatever the reason, I think most readers anticipate that the "copy" will be similar to the "original" in some way: subject, content, or tone. Whether there are any similarities here, I can't say.
a while back I had some fun with the potential of this idea: http://thebookdesigners.blogspot.com/2009/04/imagine.htmlI think this kind of tongue in cheek exploration is done more in a mood of wit and jest than anything serious. I don't think laziness would be the issue, because I am sure that there are heaps of legal hoops to jump through as well as the fact that someone has to create and assemble the art either way. But i can see how this can be annoying to designers and readers alike.
Did the original design come out after the movie, or did it inspire the look for Alex in the movie?It would be kinda sad if came out after the movie. I know Anthony Burgess wasn't too impressed with the movie, and wasn't happy that most people only knew the movie and not the book. Personally, while I think the movie is great, I prefer the book.
Post a Comment