Really dreadful book covers

[Icehaven]

This particular publisher does a great line in weirdly inappropriate and cheap-looking covers:

I've seen that before, but love it still.

[Thomas]

I don't like book covers with real life humans posing for themed photographs - i.e. all post-war-set romances and books about dead/abused children.[nb]As far as I can tell, WHSmith stocks only foam shrimp sweets, a Daily Mail magazine thing about the Titanic, and this species of horribly covered book.
[/nb]

[Lyfjaberg]

I don't like book covers with real life humans posing for themed photographs - i.e. all post-war-set romances and books about dead/abused children.[nb]As far as I can tell, WHSmith stocks only foam shrimp sweets, a Daily Mail magazine thing about the Titanic, and this species of horribly covered book.
[/nb]

I bet if I went back in time to take such a picture you'd still think it was themed. "Look at that massive, pendulous goitre: clearly a shoddy ten-minute job in a make-up van".

[Mark Steels Stockbroker]

Ballard was very well-served by David Pelham at Penguin in the early 70s.

[Beep Cleep Chimney]

James Joyce's oeuvre really suffered when it was reprinted under the Flamingo Modern Classics/Paladin banner in the mid-nineties. a combination of horribly inappropriate artwork and truly hideous design choices. Believe it or not, there was once an edition of Dubliners that looked like this:



I think the worst thing about it is it's so...slapdash. It looks like they cut round the artwork with safety scissors. Surely Joyce deserved a bit more effort than this?

Here's another one, which seems to've been mistakenly attributed to someone called "James James Joyce Joyce"



And if that wasn't bad enough, they were at it again with The Third Policeman!



The painting on it's own might not be too bad, but check out that ker-aaaaay-zeeee font! Oh ho, we're in for some wacky times ahead!!! The icing on the cake is the logo just slapped in carelessly near the bottom there, in a way that smacks of artlessness.

This one I'm including because of it's total lazyness. I mean really, they couldn't do any better than a stock photo of Chapman against a bright pink background? And gosh Eric Idle, frankly.

[Blue Jam]

Three horrible editions of Anthony Burgess novels which I have owned:







All Penguin again...

[Blue Jam]

I think Gollancz's SF Masterworks series deserves a new post of its own- some great books in some truly horrible covers, seemingly designed to make the reader look like a massive fucking geek on the train:



I suppose it would be hard to design a cover which says "this is a rewrite of The Count Of Monte Cristo and possibly the original steampunk novel, and even better than that sounds" but it's still a horrible cover for one of my favourite books ever. I have this edition which has nice rounded outer corners (not pictured) and which was inspired by the original title, Tiger, Tiger:



Not one of their worst, but another book which deserved better, and later got it:






I've not read the second of these, but sci fi babes can fuck right off:

[Bobby Treetops]

An example of an artist knowing nothing about the book their designing a cover for.



Now it's bad enough reading a book on public transport with a robot Hitler displayed across the cover but at no point does a robot Hitler feature in this book.

[Thomas]

I bet if I went back in time to take such a picture you'd still think it was themed. "Look at that massive, pendulous goitre: clearly a shoddy ten-minute job in a make-up van".

That's true. I get angry at Édith Piaf and Glenn Miller CD covers.

[thecuriousorange]

Where to start with this?

[billtheburger]

So, judging a book by its cover, we have Bono attempting to absolve Patsy Palmer of the sin of stealing a magnifying glass?!

. . . Can you get that on Kindle?

Incidentally, the bolded text is in my job description due to my inability to speak Urdu or Pashto.

Unavailable on Kindle.

[garbed_attic]

I don't think 'The Third Policeman' has ever been graced with a cover which is quite right for it, sadly. I'm currently reading it through to my girlfriend, actually - MacCruiskeen is a very difficult pancake to voice.

I also dislike Gollancz's SF Masterworks covers! Especially the one for Ursula Le Guin's 'The Dispossessed':



Shevek does not look like that.

As for Ballard, surely Phoebe Gloeckner is the master of epic Ballard covers...



Actually, I think I want a poster with every Ballard book cover on it! Except for these new boring elegant white and black ones.

[Jerzy Bondov]

Shevek does not look like that.

That's the first one I thought of! They have done one of the round corner editions for that as well though:

Better, if a bit obvious.

[Don_Preston]

I'm currently reading this masterpiece with this terrible cover. Really hammering the allegory home there.

[Thomas]

I'm not a fan of yer basic Harry Potter covers. The owl looks good here, on the cover of 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets', big fan of its sweeping wings, but what is Harry? What is Harry?

[Petey Pate]

I think Gollancz's SF Masterworks series deserves a new post of its own- some great books in some truly horrible covers, seemingly designed to make the reader look like a massive fucking geek on the train:

Those were the first examples I thought of before reading this thread.  Here's another one that screams "artist didn't actually read the book" (the other designs with a spray can are much more effective), and the colours are horrible.

[Old Nehamkin]

I'm not a fan of yer basic Harry Potter covers. The owl looks good here, on the cover of 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets', big fan of its sweeping wings, but what is Harry? What is Harry?

The original "adult" covers are pretty rubbish too:




PREPARE TO ENTER THE MAGICAL WORLD OF HARRY POTTER!!!

[Queneau]

'Funny, imaginative, magical

Spoiler alert

and for kids!

[close]

'

[Blue Jam]

An example of an artist knowing nothing about the book their designing a cover for.



Now it's bad enough reading a book on public transport with a robot Hitler displayed across the cover but at no point does a robot Hitler feature in this book.

I was thinking "maybe they read The Man In The High Castle and got confused, but TMITHC doesn't feature a robot Hitler either...

Shevek does not look like that.

We could have a whole new thread on this subject- "that isn't my Harry Potter!" etc. I think that's partly why this one annoys me so much:


This chap could perhaps pass himself off as the rough-arsed Gully Foyle, but the refined Fourmyle of Ceres? I think not. Alright, it was a major transformation, but I got the impression that Gully Foyle was lean and fit from lugging space cargo around... and his inspiration, Edmond Dantes, was fit, healthy and annoying to all of his jealous colleagues, just as Ned Maddstone was to his classmates in The Stars' Tennis Balls.

I refused to watch The Golden Compass as I had enjoyed the book from which it was adapted and decided everyone in the film was miscast, even though it may have been exactly what Philip Pullman wanted- fuck it, that wasn't my Lord Asriel and Mrs Coulter. I had a different reaction to A Confederacy of Dunces though- I couldn't help picturing Ignatius J Reilly as anything too far removed from the cover of the edition I picked up:



Maybe if a film adaptation was made fans of the book would get very, very angry at any actor cast as the lead.

[Thomas]

Ah, a copy from the original Auschwitz print run. Good find.

We could have a whole new thread on this subject- "that isn't my Harry Potter!" etc.

See also - Leonardo DiCaprio in The Great Gatsby, 2013.

[acrow]

I had a different reaction to A Confederacy of Dunces though- I couldn't help picturing Ignatius J Reilly as anything too far removed from the cover of the edition I picked up:



Maybe if a film adaptation was made fans of the book would get very, very angry at any actor cast as the lead.

did you know that they've tried to get a film adaptation up and running multiple times? first with john belushi, then with john candy, chris farley, will ferrel and most recently zach galifanakis...

john waters wanted to make it with divine!

[Petey Pate]

The edition of Animal Farm I own is rather ugly.



Browsing through google images, it seems that the book hasn't much luck with covers over the years.  The one with the tiger on the previous page is a parody.

The original "adult" covers are pretty rubbish too:




PREPARE TO ENTER THE MAGICAL WORLD OF HARRY POTTER!!!

There's some really garish foreign Harry Potter book covers on this page, as well as a British with a seal of approval from Ian Hislop.

http://thelastmuggle.com/2010/12/19/judging-a-book-by-its-cover-harry-potter-and-the-chamber-of-secrets/

[kidsick5000]

Not one of their worst, but another book which deserved better, and later got it:

I've not read the book itself, only been told about it, but aren't these covers massive spoilers?

Spoiler alert

The lead character is only revealed to be a mouse later on?

[close]

I could easily be wrong though.

[Blue Jam]

I've not read the book itself, only been told about it, but aren't these covers massive spoilers?

No, they're not... and read it, it's great.

[thecuriousorange]

The most bizzare Joyce cover of them all.



"A truly extraordinary novel."
                   Ewan McGregor

On the FRONT cover too!

[Queneau]

[Bobby Treetops]

For some unknown reason I've read this book of short stories which all have 'a twist in the tale'



The only enjoyment I got from reading it was to see how many pages I got into each story before I guessed the rather obvious twist at the end.

Still nothing will ever beat the 'twist' at the end the Italian post-apocalyptic film, Rats - Night of Terror.

[non capisco]

I think Gollancz's SF Masterworks series deserves a new post of its own- some great books in some truly horrible covers, seemingly designed to make the reader look like a massive fucking geek on the train:

That's actually an excerpt from a future Eastenders storyline where Phil gets addicted to LSD and looks in the mirror.

[chocolateboy]

Most of these look like things of beauty compared to the abominations that crop up in the world of self-publishing:

http://lousybookcovers.tumblr.com/

For some unknown reason I've read this book of short stories which all have 'a twist in the tale'

The only enjoyment I got from reading it was to see how many pages I got into each story before I guessed the rather obvious twist at the end.

If you enjoy hate-reading Jeffrey Archer's highly-original tales, you might enjoy this. One of its (interlinked) stories is a spot-on pastiche and evisceration of Archer's hackery.

[Nuclear Optimism]

What were they thinking?