That seems really ego-trippy for such a hack.

It's not up to her, though. It's all based on sales -- if you're selling enough books, and especially enough backlist, the publisher wants readers to know you wrote this more than what the title is.

It's common to start with a bigger title, smaller name until you gain a readership.

That seems really ego-trippy for such a hack.

It's not up to her, though. It's all based on sales -- if you're selling enough books, and especially enough backlist, the publisher wants readers to know you wrote this more than what the title is.

Yeah, but I was looking at Amazon's bestseller list, and the only fiction authors with names bigger than the title are Nicholas Sparks and Charlaine Harris, and even their names aren't so insanely huge as Jane Green's. (Also Glenn Beck, but that doesn't surprise me.)

I guess I don't understand why Dan Brown's name wouldn't take up the whole cover of the book, if it's based on sales.

It's not up to her, though.

Yeah, nothing about covers are ever up to an author, although if you have some pull, you can get some things changed. I had a friend who hated her latest cover, in part because the primary color was, as she put it, "Gamma radiation green." Her editor tried to tell her that the art department had wanted to transition to something a little different from the blue hues the previous book covers had had, but she put her foot down on the green. It was bad.

But for whatever reason, that shade of green has been popular over the last six months. That's another thing you'll see with covers-- not only the styles, but the primary colors will also trend. Right now, red dresses are very popular in historicals.

Yeah, but I was looking at Amazon's bestseller list, and the only fiction authors with names bigger than the title are Nicholas Sparks and Charlaine Harris, and even their names aren't so insanely huge as Jane Green's.

Yeah, it's weird. But it's still not her decision.

The stupid thing is, I'm sure it went through, like, seventeen meetings to get it to precisely that size, and there will never be any recognizable difference made.

Yeah, but I was looking at Amazon's bestseller list, and the only fiction authors with names bigger than the title are Nicholas Sparks and Charlaine Harris, and even their names aren't so insanely huge as Jane Green's.

Yeah, it's weird. But it's still not her decision.

I'm just annoyed because I dislike her books so much.

Last Wednesday, I was doing a purge on my romance bookshelves, trying to winnow them down a bit. Only managed to get rid of 14 books out of an estimated 250, though--the big purge I had back in the beginning of 2006, when I got rid of about 2/3rds of my romances, was as far as I think I'm willing to go.

However, it's now obvious that my Nora Roberts books compose almost 1/3rd of the collection. She's the one whose books have been branded the most out of all the ones in my collection. Since I've been reading her so long, I've got a wide range of cover styles for her various books: the clinch for most of the Silhouette books, the abstract drawing with big title/smaller author name for her first standalone novels, the no-drawing covers for her more recent standalones with her name in huge letters.

Yeah, nothing about covers are ever up to an author, although if you have some pull, you can get some things changed.

So, so true. I'm still astonished we were able to have as much input on the GCS cover as we did. Of course, having Pete hand them a completed cover image helped immensely.

I'm just annoyed because I dislike her books so much.

Heh. I've never actually read her, but I remember when her first book came out.

However, it's now obvious that my Nora Roberts books compose almost 1/3rd of the collection.

Of romances I've held onto, her trilogies and Patricia Gaffney's old historicals are the big winners.

NR takes up about the same amount of rrom on my shelves, too. Even more when you add in the JD Robb's.

I'm curious Steph, what is it that you don't care for about Jane Green's writing?

Not Steph, but one of the things that infuriated me about her early books at least, was that they seemed to epitomize everything bad about the chick lit genre-- all the labels, the shallowness, the sheer vapidness of how her characters treated relationships. Jemima J was like the dark side of Bridget Jones and oh, how I hated her.

Worst of all, it didn't feel as if the character really learned anything of value by the end of the story.