Comments: 2
Linda Hilton 3 weeks ago
I didn't respond on Twitter because, well, I didn't. BUT . . . . .

It seems odd to me that an author of Goodkind's status (sales) in a genre where art is a Really Big Fuckin' Deal wouldn't have had more input on and approval rights over cover art. I suspect there's more to the story than came out on Twitter.

I was never a big name in romance, so I can't speak from much personal experience, but what little experience I did have was pretty much negative. I had NO input at all on three out of seven covers.

#1 -- No input from me at all, but cover turned out halfway decent.
#2 -- I expressed a preference for an artist (Morgan Kane). Cover art was nice but didn't really represent the book.
#3 -- No input at all. Cover was pretty sucky.
#4 -- Was asked by editor if X detail was in book; I added that detail to match the cover, but it never showed up on the cover.
#5 -- NO INPUT and the cover totally sucked.
#6 -- Was asked for input but the cover was horrible and bore no resemblance to anything in the book.
#7 -- Was asked for input but first cover art idea was horrible beyond belief; second was only one step up from horrible.

Many authors do have input on their cover art, and some of the artists -- especially for fantasy!!!! -- are beyond wonderful. True geniuses. I'm not an artist, but I've learned over the years to recognize some of the great ones. And yes, I've been known to buy books solely for the cover art.

I'm not sure why Goodkind hates this cover, but if he really does, he should have taken it up with his editor. I'm sure he has the clout to get things changed. Instead, he has pissed off a whole lot of people.

As for Sherman Alexie, well, maybe the truth hurts.
"So it goes." 3 weeks ago
That's three big YA names to go down in the past few weeks. These writer outings seem so much more quiet than the others, but I really respect that letter about Alexie. This is all tough in so many ways.