« Oh Happy Days!
Shadow Lover by Anne Stuart »

Maybe it IS Chick Porn!

From time to time, I find myself defending my reading material to my pretentious, hoity-toity friends– you know, the type of folks who say, “As far as I’m concerned, true literature died in the 19th century!” Like get over yourself, Shakespeare. Anyway, one particular friend calls romance novels “nothing more than pornography for women,” and while there’s nothing wrong with pornography, I happen to think that there are romance novels out there that are written well enough that they should be considered literature! However, when I’m faced with a cover like this, I just kind of have to shake my head and sigh in defeat. I have no problem with nudity, alright? There are romance novels out there with naked guys on the front cover that are quite tastefully done and I have no problem with them whatsoever. This… this is just… sleazy. Hell, the story between the covers could be the Next Great American Novel and I wouldn’t know ’cause I’d be reluctant to pick it up. Never mind that it objectifies the male body–Penthouse and its ilk have been doing that to women for years–but… I can’t get over that apple. Look at that apple. How big is that apple that it’s enough to cover this guy’s dirty bits? Seriously! And am I the only one who sees a smiley face on this guy’s torso? The eyes are the nipples, the nose is his sternum… do you see it?

All kidding aside, you guys, how can our beloved genre get the respect it truly deserves when we have to deal with covers like these? I’m almost 100% sure that the author of this book had nothing to do with the picking of this cover and for that, I feel really bad for her. You gotta get your butt to the graphics department, girl, and give those nerds a very stern talking-to!

Oh, and this nightmare was brought to us by Laura. Thanks, Laura!

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 23rd, 2006 at 1:31 pm and is filed under Covers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Responses to “Maybe it IS Chick Porn!”

  1. web
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 2:06 pm
    1

    It burnssss us! It burnssss us!

  2. Evan
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 2:09 pm
    2

    Think of it as a Magritte allusion. There. Doesn’t it seem classier now?

  3. web
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 2:12 pm
    3

    Wait, isn’t porn supposed to be *attractive*? The sleeze factor is the *least* of what’s wrong with that cover.

  4. Shuzluva
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 3:11 pm
    4

    I read the SBTB interview with the Ellora’s Cave folks and I just can’t understand something. WHO ARE THESE READERS ASKING FOR THESE TYPES OF COVERS? WHAT IS THE FIXATION WITH MANTITTY? There must be hoards of readers asking for them because they keep popping up.

    I love me my naked men, but I have a hard time bringing them to the beach for an enjoyable read. And, if I’m going to be perfectly honest, I don’t see tons of men reading Playboy or Penthouse on the beach - unless they’re hiding them behind another magazine - which I’m seriously tempted to do with covers like these.

    Sad, but true…the most innocuous covers appeal to me due to my deep embarassment of being caught reading romance/romantica/erotica. I know, sad, sad, sad. Especially ’cause so many of these books are so good.

    Sorry for the rant Bam, but I saw that naked chest and a switch just got flipped, and not in a good way.

  5. Bam
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 3:53 pm
    5

    Sorry for the rant Bam

    Rants of all kind are welcome here, dude. You know that. It’s cool. Shake ya tailfeather.

    A coworker just passed by, looked over my shoulder, and saw the cover. She asked what the hell it was. I told her it was a cover for an erotic romance. She said, “Huh. That’s why I don’t read that trash. It looks like porn.”

    Okay, so she’s a snobby asshole. But she has a point, even if she’s being a snobby asshole about it.

  6. Danielle
    Posted: May 23rd, 2006 at 4:01 pm
    6

    I’m more perturbed by the body hair. I think body hair should be banned from models, male or female. (Asides from the hair on their craniums.) Because it always looks like it was glued on by a second grader.

  7. Sandie
    Posted: May 24th, 2006 at 9:02 am
    7

    You know…I wonder about this model. Do you think he posed for a porn photo layout?? Think he was brought into a studio and they just turned the lights on and bam, there ya go?

    Yeah, people really look down their noses at romance because of covers just like this. Which just kills me…

    I’m with Shuzluva on the pre-occupation with man booby…just, um, don’t understand it.

    Also, the anal designer in me wants to point out that the shadow on the apple is not consistent with the shadow cast on the models body…wonder what % they had to increase the image of that apple to cover his twig & nuts??
    Laura

  8. einsteinella
    Posted: May 24th, 2006 at 10:51 am
    8

    Does nothing for me as he is obviously not ready for action. And, hey, dude, ever heard of Mystic Tan??

  9. Kate R
    Posted: May 26th, 2006 at 4:03 pm
    9

    who is laura and why is she doing this to us????

  10. Kat O+
    Posted: May 31st, 2006 at 7:04 am
    10

    OMG, he has two bellybuttons!

SexyComments by BorkWeb

Must Reads



  • Authors and Readers

  • Ebook Publishers

  • More Links