> I don't think I'll dox myself, since she kept to herself a lot.

It took me very little detective work to determine that you ...(drum roll) are me.

No wonder I almost posted the above.

> I judge books by their covers.

On second thought, although I like great covers, you're not me. Carry on; you do you.

I always judge books by their covers - that's what covers are for! You look at the image they chose to use, read the blurb on the back, and decide whether you want to read it.

(Yes, I know - the phrase means "Look past surface details and see inner beauty" and so on. It's just that for books the heuristic works pretty well).

It's a good heuristic for pretty much everything.

"Thoughts about a thing" is a kind of cover too. Portable, personalized, communicable. Wildly popular.

Does it get at the inner reality? Maybe, maybe not. Is it useful? Yes.

Science could be called a cover optimizer.

It doesn't really, because a book cover is advertising, not information - it doesn't really tell you any more about the contents of the book than the pictures of food on a fast food menu accurately represent what you get on your plate.

A book with a cover is a collaboration of artists. Perhaps forced by the publisher, that the author and painter would never attempt on their own, but a collaboration nonetheless. Together, they have created something more than the sum of its parts.

And while it's true this can neither vouch for nor indict the writing itself, the rest of us are allowed to enjoy the art just the same.

Besides, the new digital era debunks your claim... cover images are still included in epubs even if those do not sit on the wire rack next to the cashier at the store.

Yes, it's marketing material.

Marketing material is often the best reference you have to discover what something is about. Also, the pictures of food on a menu usually inform you better what you'll get than a realistic picture.

Marketing has many functions, a large share of them are hindered by misleading you. A few are not. The result is usually very transparent (but effective).

That's actually a good analogy, because the pictures of food on fast food menus are still useful in most cases. You can see the lettuce poking out and ask for it to be removed, or ask for extra cheese.

The way a book is advertised absolutely tells you about the book, in most cases. There is a series of thought and decisions which go into making a cover, including finding a compatible artist and giving them a solid brief.

As with fast food, there are exceptions... But they are exceptions. It may be more of an heuristic than a rule, but it's undoubtedly often useful. The cover is part of the book, and an important part; both up to and beyond the advertisement.

It’s not a good analogy. Fast food images show the sandwich, even if a better version of it. This isn’t always the case for books, for instance in the expanse series the authors stated they write the book and send it off and then the publisher picks an image which has little relation to the books plot and was solely chosen to look cool alongside the books name.

I'm not a super fan, but searching for 'The Expanse book covers' looks about right to my eyes.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=the+expanse+book+covers&atb...

You see they're in space, you get the impression that there's ships, that it's gritty, that it's sci fi, etc.

None of those images look a million miles from the tone of the series, much less outright misleading.

If there are exceptions to that, then they're exceptions to a clear general rule; much like with fast food menu pics.

It's a bit of both.

And there is taste to consider too. Good books get good cover art.

Or do they?

Agree about books but I've found you can judge a restaurant by the font they choose outside for their name (!).

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

My recollection is that the Children of the Earth series is basically soft porn in anthropological wrappings.

Basically yes. Back in the day they were one of the most popular books for "concerned parents" to try to get banned from school libraries because of the sex scenes. And the anthropology wasn't that accurate even for the time, although it was amusingly correct in its assertion that Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens were amorous together, long before people like Svante Pääbo showed that with actual genetics.

I read the first chapter and then got bored and read the synopsis on Wikipedia. That kinda ruined the magic for me.

Just like with video game skyboxes, it's more fun sometimes to look at the cover and imagine that the book is profound and would deeply resonate with one's soul. In Skyrim you can actually visit the mountains on the horizon, and they're just boring mountains. What a letdown!

If you only made in through one chapter you saved yourself a lot of time. The first book is by far the best of the ones I read, and the series goes downhill very quickly. But I know what you mean. It's an amazing concept.

I can't help but feel great empathy.. I wish you and your family all the best