The Back of Books Rant

[evadne_noel]

Look, I’m not demanding. I don’t expect a lot from the back covers of my books. Yes, I am somewhat annoyed with the current habit of using quotes from people I don’t care about blathering on about how fantastic the novel is. I really would prefer a description of what happens in the book. But when the plot summary is inaccurate, it’s just as

Comments

[agentmaly]

Yeah, those sorts of things have been bugging me recently, too. There is an odd trend recently to just stick quotes from people I've never heard of who I assume are supposed to be vaguely important on the back of books and call that good, isn't there? I find that this happens a lot also with books published a good while ago and books that're famous enough that it's assumed I already know what they're about (which, of course, I sometimes don't). But I never really saw it happening much to newly-published books until just recently, and.. it's annoying me. It helps to actually tell me what the book will be about, especially when it's newly-published, and therefore harder to find information on

[evadne_noel]

I totally agree with your mini-rant. I don't CARE what those people think. I want to know what it's about.

I hate it when they focus on inconsquential things in summaries. Do they think we won't notice?

[dreamstrifer]

I just checked a book out of the library, and it said it was a bout a mother and a daughter who were separated for ten or so years. The daughter went to finishing school, and the mother worked on her late husbands freight driving business (Set in the 1800's), and it said it was about how the daughter had to learn to love the mother she "never knew while looking at her own lavish and opulent lifestyle."

The mother and daughter didn't remeet until like, three chapters from the end of the book. It was motly about the mother, instead of the daughter.

It made me kind of mad, because if the back of the book had a better summary, I would have enjoyed the book more.

SO I totally agree with you.

[evadne_noel]

That's exactly the same thing! They don't meet until the end, just like Rachel and Terrence don't even get engaged until the end.

Obviously, whoever wrote those summaries just flipped to the ends of the books.

[musemuffin]

They do it with movies, too. One good example: marketing Signs as another scary movie, when it that wasn't the point of the movie at all. I personally think it's the reason Signs flopped so badly. Same thing with Ocean's 12; I realize the plot is just slightly complicated(too complicated, but that's a separate issue), but they could've at least mentioned the French thief in the trailer.
What's really weird to do is watch the trailer right after you've seen the movie, and you see how they manipulate scenes to make it seem like something completely different is going on.

It's all marketing. They're not trying to be accurate with the blurbs; they're just trying to sell you the book or movie. That's all.

[evadne_noel]

The thing with "Signs" is that I don't think an actual summary of the movie would have sold the movie, and it would have flopped anyway. "Man rediscovers his spirituality and moves on with his life due to the peripheral actions of aliens" would not have done well.

But a real summary of the book would have made no difference. But, you're right. It is all just marketing.

La

[lijz_chick]

Ha, 'musemuffin' I noticed that too, ^_^ I have a very hard time watching the movie trailers after I see the movie exspecially when they put in things that they don't even show in the movie, (actually they did that alot in ROTK)

But one time my mom saw a comercial for a movie, and apparently whatever she saw made her laugh and want to see it. We saw it, and it wasn't there, just a reference to it that wasn't remotely funny. My mom will NEVER trust advertizers again.

I can understand your frustration Evadne, giving someone 90 years to do something, and coming back and they did a sucky job of it, it's retarded.

Re: La

[evadne_noel]

I think the 90 years is the part that gets me the most. It's not like someone didn't have the time to actually read it.

[notalwaysweak]

I have the feeling with a LOT of books that the blurb writer didn't even read the damn thing.

When I was doing work experience at Allen & Unwin, one of my tasks was to write a blurb for a book I'd read, and it was actually incredibly hard, but still. I did do a better job than the example you've given.

[evadne_noel]

I agree that one actually reads the books. Blurb writing is hard, but, c'mon. 90 years!