?

Log in

The Past | The Previous

Misleading Covers



Doesn't this cover just say 'gay porn' to you? The guy totally has Fuck-Me-I'm-Gay-and-Torn-Up-About-It-Eyes.

It's a young adult novel, however, and on the HSC list. I saw it last night and was told, in no uncertain terms, that it was not about gay love, which I thought was a complete misrepresentation of this cover and the title Raw.* This is what the back cover of the book said:

Sixteen year old Brett Dalton is a tough guy: hardened, angry, uncaring and always ready to use his fists. That's how he gets into trouble. When the world hates you, you might as well hate back. But when Brett is nabbed by the cops for stealing and sent to a juvenile rehabilitation centre, he's trapped in a grave new world.


Gay. Prison. Porn.

That's why I'd buy this book.




* It should be said that I was told Raw was quite good, and in fact fabulous, and that I should read it. In no uncertain terms.

Comments

( 22 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )
ataxi
Mar. 1st, 2007 01:21 am (UTC)
That cover says "Morrissey album sleeve" to me. Almost the same thing I guess.
underdogautopsy
Mar. 1st, 2007 03:24 am (UTC)
haha! nice
ataxi
Mar. 1st, 2007 03:42 am (UTC)
covers separated at birth
underdogautopsy
Mar. 1st, 2007 03:48 am (UTC)
Re: covers separated at birth


I work FT in a record shop; your comment rang immediately true (:
ataxi
Mar. 1st, 2007 03:58 am (UTC)
Re: covers separated at birth
It feels so true I would have been amazed if the book's cover designer wasn't either consciously or unconsciously influenced by the Smiths/Moz sleeves. But then I found this article which discusses their various origins and I'm now assuming it's just some whole subgeneric photographic style.
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:43 am (UTC)
Re: covers separated at birth
you know, i see your point with the covers.
ataxi
Mar. 1st, 2007 07:34 am (UTC)
Re: covers separated at birth
We'll I'll see your seen point and raise you a blatantly right.
possbert
Mar. 1st, 2007 03:54 am (UTC)
"nabbed by the cops"? Do young people speak like this or is it a euphamism? *snigger*
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:43 am (UTC)
well, that's usually the problem with YA stuff, isn't it? none it sounds like actual kids.
(Deleted comment)
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 08:34 am (UTC)
leave my sweeping generalisations alone!
ironed_orchid
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:33 am (UTC)
Yup. I'd fuck 'im.
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:42 am (UTC)
if only you were a gay male :P
ironed_orchid
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:45 am (UTC)
What if I dressed in a suit and used a strap on?
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:48 am (UTC)
that's your solution to everything.
ironed_orchid
Mar. 1st, 2007 05:11 am (UTC)
Hey, if it works, why change tactics?
markdeniz
Mar. 1st, 2007 05:32 am (UTC)
Isn't that the lead singer from boy band Bros?
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 06:26 am (UTC)
like i said, gay prison porn.
joey_j0jo
Mar. 1st, 2007 08:59 am (UTC)
Only Standard English kiddies study that.
(:
I'm totally above it.
And got stuck with Emma and Wild Swans.
Now that's worth weeping over.
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 09:53 am (UTC)
ah, i've read EMMA, yes i have. that there was painful.

the girl who showed me the book read it last year, i think, in year ten. i dunno. she's not hscing this year and i have to read OTHELLO now.
joey_j0jo
Mar. 1st, 2007 10:02 am (UTC)
Why are you reading OTHELLO?
I have to read Wild Swans! It's like anti-communist propaganda!
And incredibly thick. Even more horrid than Emma.

Plus, I like Shakespeare.
benpeek
Mar. 1st, 2007 10:09 am (UTC)
i am reading OTHELLO because i am excellent and amazing in my work :) i've never heard of WILD SWANS--i'll go have a look.

(yeah, i don't mind shakespeare. the tragedies, mostly.)
bodhichitta0
Mar. 1st, 2007 04:58 pm (UTC)
Never judge a book by its... oh damn, I love the hoyay. I'm so disappointed.
( 22 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )