Comments on: Covers http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/ Weblog of National Bestselling, Award-Winning Novelist Sylvia Day Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:34:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Keller http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3754 Keller Sat, 15 Oct 2005 10:08:38 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3754 It doesn't scream "Historical", but it's very attractive and the name "Susan Johnson" will override any confusion concerning the setting of the book--but woe betide a brand new author!! It doesn’t scream “Historical”, but it’s very attractive and the name “Susan Johnson” will override any confusion concerning the setting of the book–but woe betide a brand new author!!

]]> By: saskia http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3751 saskia Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:57:41 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3751 The cover definitely doesn't say historical, I always have to check with Susan J's though. Pure Sin is my favourite and it doesn't shout historical. Neither does Brazen or Love Storm. It's quite clever marketing but my ideal would be a peep of corsetry being undone by a man's hand, I'd grab the book no questions asked :grin: I hope you get one you like, Sylvia! You're Misled is FAB! The cover definitely doesn’t say historical, I always have to check with Susan J’s though. Pure Sin is my favourite and it doesn’t shout historical. Neither does Brazen or Love Storm. It’s quite clever marketing but my ideal would be a peep of corsetry being undone by a man’s hand, I’d grab the book no questions asked :grin: I hope you get one you like, Sylvia! You’re Misled is FAB!

]]> By: Danica http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3749 Danica Fri, 14 Oct 2005 21:31:21 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3749 The cover is gogeous! It doesn't say historical to me, but you know, Kasey Michaels, who writes fabulous historicals, has really cartooney covers, and I bought her anyway. The cover is gogeous! It doesn’t say historical to me, but you know, Kasey Michaels, who writes fabulous historicals, has really cartooney covers, and I bought her anyway.

]]> By: jaq http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3748 jaq Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:47:50 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3748 It's a beautiful cover, but it doesn't say historical. It’s a beautiful cover, but it doesn’t say historical.

]]> By: Jordan http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3747 Jordan Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:22:55 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3747 I think the cover is gorgeous...for a contemporary book. :wink: I'd pick it up and read the back for Susan J.'s name alone. I think the cover is gorgeous…for a contemporary book. :wink: I’d pick it up and read the back for Susan J.’s name alone.

]]> By: Estella http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3746 Estella Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:13:50 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3746 I usually don't look at a book for its' cover---but by the authors name----and no I would never think that cover is a historical read. I usually don’t look at a book for its’ cover—but by the authors name—-and no I would never think that cover is a historical read.

]]> By: Amanda Carrell http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3745 Amanda Carrell Fri, 14 Oct 2005 03:10:28 +0000 http://www.sylviaday.com/blog/2005/10/13/680/#comment-3745 I have to say that a cover like that would make me think contemporary automatically. A few years back I never read straight contemps, only historicals and paranormals that had some contemporary settings, so I probably would have passed this book by. The cover itself is gorgeous. Much more realistic that bodice rippers (even though I'm one of the few that always will *love* bodice ripper covers *sigh*). If they'd had the woman in period-looking undergarments (maybe not completely accurate, but something that looked more old-fashioned), then it might clue me in. I have to say that a cover like that would make me think contemporary automatically. A few years back I never read straight contemps, only historicals and paranormals that had some contemporary settings, so I probably would have passed this book by.

The cover itself is gorgeous. Much more realistic that bodice rippers (even though I’m one of the few that always will *love* bodice ripper covers *sigh*). If they’d had the woman in period-looking undergarments (maybe not completely accurate, but something that looked more old-fashioned), then it might clue me in.

]]>