The Cover of the Book

[LHX]

is a reflection of the content of the book

a cover determines whether you want to approach something or whether you want to avoid something

accordingly
a intelligent author puts as much effort into the presentation as the content warrants

if you cant judge a book by its cover - then what in the hell else can you possibly judge it by?



the words "nobody understands"
can either be a reason to embark on a quest
or
a reason to whine and complain throughout eternity



(if 'nobody understands', it is quite possible that you may also be doing something wrong)

[Alucard]

i agree. i have always questioned this meme. who the fuk says i cant? when i look for a random book in the library i sure as hell judge by the cover.

[Cainad (dec.)]

"FUCK YOU, I AM A MISUNDERSTOOD ARTISTE! PPL DONT GET MY ANTHOLOGY OF POEMS ABOUT FLOOR WAXING BECAUSE THEY ARE TEH STOOPID! AND MY DECISION TO PUT A PICTURE OF ROSS PEROT ON THE COVER WAS ARTISTIC EXPRESSION!"



Yeah, I judge the current edition of the PD by its cover. Nothing wrong with that, 'cause it's still fucking win.

[B_M_W]

then what in the hell else can you possibly judge it by?

Um, content?

You said it yourself.



I don't know about you, but when buy or borrow a book, its with the intent to read it, not to stare at the cover. Most of the time at the university library the pretty dust cover is removed anyway.

[LMNO]

I figured they always meant, "You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, though you probably will, you asshole."

[Jasper]

then what in the hell else can you possibly judge it by?

Um, content?

You said it yourself.



I don't know about you, but when buy or borrow a book, its with the intent to read it, not to stare at the cover. Most of the time at the university library the pretty dust cover is removed anyway.

Do you read every book you see?

Do you judge every book you see?

[Triple Zero]

covers are mostly useful because they're hard and keep the book in better condition, also they must have colours on lettering on the spine so it's easy to find it back when it's on your bookshelves.

for judging a book i haven't read (to decide if i want to read it, not just for judging), i usually check excerpts, what other people say about the book, and sometimes the title and the abstract if they seem like a good indication for the book. incidentally these things are sometimes (but not always, and definitely not exclusively) found on the cover. also, i will leaf through the book a bit, and scan the ToC.

to sum this back into what the saying "dont judge a book by its cover" means:

- it means being shallow and going off only at your first impressions
- i personally think that checking out an actual excerpt/blurb on the back of a book isn't that shallow, unless it's a bunch of "magazine X said this book is exhilarating" crap.
- if you are trying to judge the book with the intent of reading it, in an effort to save time so you dont have to read every book (as felix said), i think the story is totally different.

you must have first impressions. for the simple fact that the "consumption" (reading) of a book is in fact a series of impressions, and, some of them have to be the first, right?

[LMNO]

Are we forgetting the original maxim is a metaphor, or have we just stretched it to the breaking point?

[Triple Zero]

well that was why i tried to "sum it back" (that's not even a dutch expression i have no idea where that brainfart came from).

i need coffee.

the point is, if this is a metaphor, we should interpret "cover" as any kind of superficial information you can easily glean about a book (or subject). this would also include critics, summaries, excerpts written in other journals.
unless you wanna interpret the metaphor as "judging by looks only", in which case you can include the book cover and the pretty pictures inside the book. and the font used. and whether the pic of the author on the inner flap of the book smiles at you.

so, if we're not getting that straight this discussion is headed for a shitload of confusion.

enjoy!

(and now, COFFEE)

[Cain]

Literalism, ITT

[LMNO]

I looked at that post, and judged it to be Glib.

[Cain]

Indeed it was performed with offhand and unusual ease.

[B_M_W]

then what in the hell else can you possibly judge it by?

Um, content?

You said it yourself.



I don't know about you, but when buy or borrow a book, its with the intent to read it, not to stare at the cover. Most of the time at the university library the pretty dust cover is removed anyway.

Do you read every book you see?

Do you judge every book you see?

I usually look first at the title. In nonfiction, the title is something informative about the contents normally. I next might look at the author. If the title and the author interest me, I open the book and check the copyright page, usually there is a subject description of a few words. Once I know that, I flip through a couple of the chapter headings.

Most of the books I read would be considered dry by many people's standards.

The point is, the judgment is on the content, and not the cover. The title and author are something that stand alone apart from whatever cover design there might be. Seldom will you find a book without a title on its spine.