I was at the bookstore a few days ago with a friend and I noticed what I’m hoping isn’t the new thing in romance covers–breasts. That’s right breasts. Now I KNOW romance covers are famous for some cleavage, but I’m not talking clinch where the heroine’s dress has understandably shifted a tad. I’m talking just a woman with some big round impossible to miss breasts. As in your eyes go no where else.
What is up with that? I am the market for romance novels, right? They didn’t suddenly discover that fifteen-year-old boys are making some massive shift from video games to romance novels, did they? Because, seriously a pair of big round breasts just doesn’t pull me in. Yeah, it gets my attention…but in a kind of OMG way.
I’ve noticed similar things with magazine covers too. Although they don’t seem quite as fixated on breasts as just plain old bare flesh. I buy Shape magazine because I like to work out, but they insist on putting skinny (not even muscular) actresses on their covers in bikinis. Some of those women I just really want to give a biscuit and I can honestly say I buy the magazine despite the cover not because of it…I actually cringe when I see it.
So, what gives? Is it my age? Is it a cup size thing? Do you have to be a D+ cup to feel the pull? Is it my Midwestern upbringing? Do skin and bones and blow-up doll breasts cause women somewhere else to line up?
What?
No related posts.
I know! I’m still scratching my head over that reissue of a Susan Elizabeth Phillips title focused uncomfortably on a pair of breasts in a pink tank.
Oddly enough, when an old Keira Knightley-boob controversy popped up (you know, how magazines and posters always plump up her chest), there was an article that said female readers of Glamour, Cosmo, etc are more likely to pick up a magazine with a cover model who has a good cup size. I’m guessing it has to do with the negative connotations of small breasts. I don’t know what that has to do with the romance genre though…
Interesting on the big breasts selling better to women. Although I have to say it isn’t just the size that bothers me. It is the unnatural roundness and massive cleavage. They do get your attention though….
Beats me. I see a cover with big, round boobs and I just laugh, especially if the heroine has supposedly already been pregnant once and it’s set in a time period before really good sturdy bras were invented.
And enough with the guys and their washerboard abs already!
You know what gives me whiplash in the Romance aisle. Male backsides.
I LOVE the whole male chest, cut off head cover.
Why?
Because I always picture the heroes as Asian (like my hubby).
This cover allows me to put my own face to the hero.
BTW…I think most of the Regency heroes ARE Asian, they have coal black hair, a year round tan, and a hairless chest.
You made me go take another look at my next cover — heroine is wearing a tank, but she’s not all that well-endowed (and the book title covers them anyway).
I was in a bookstore a few days ago, and I have to admit I didn’t really notice the trend. But I tend to browse for author names. Now I’ll have to go back and look again.
I don’t think it is a full fledged trend yet–just maybe the beginning of one. The ones that really jumped off the shelf at me were trade sized, but it made me wonder if this was the beginning of something like the tramp stamp trend we saw in urban fantasy.
I really hope not….(I btw liked the tramp stamp covers).
I agree 100%.
In fact, I prefer covers that focus on “symbols” that are important to the story. It gives my imagination something more to ponder than – doesn’t that position hurt or isn’t she cold?
The grab it and growl covers also feed into stereotypes about romance novels. The men in my house might pick up the book and give the cover a once over, but they aren’t going to read it, boobs or no boobs. The woman in the house just thinks either “not again” or “this author did not have input on her cover.”
Getting to design the cover is another benefit of being self-pubbed. And props to my computer programmer/IT guy hubby who has done a great job with all of my covers – without resorting to “boobage” a single time.
Women are expected to share the “male gaze” so far as marketing goes.
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/faq-what-is-the-%E2%80%9Cmale-gaze%E2%80%9D/
You do have to wonder how the art meetings go….
“I think they need to be bigger.”
“But we need room for the title and author’s name.”
“Do we?”
“Hmmmm….”
I read an article years ago (if only I could remember where) that suggested women were likely to buy things with images of women — that they wanted to look like — on them. I don’t think I fall into that spectrum, but I’m no more likely to buy it for the beheaded man-chest that’s been the popular thing for so long either.
For romance, I prefer the amusing drawings or couple images that imply a relationship rather than an objectification. But then that only matters if I’m browsing the shelves looking for something new. If I read a review that says a book is good, it doesn’t matter what’s on the cover.
Well, maybe that is my problem. I’ve never been unhappy with my easy to manage cup size.
And I certainly don’t want breasts that look like someone inflated them like the ones I’ve seen on a few covers…
Jessica Rabbit had more realistic breasts than some of these ladies.
Are the artists males perhaps? And that’s what THEY want to look at while working? LOL
I haven’t noticed this trend. But then again, I usually don’t pay attention to the female on the cover, but the male.
And that’s coming from a macho guy who happens to read romance
I will admit, I’ve bought such books… and made fun of the female. Because my breasts measure in a bit further down the alphabet than D, and I know for a fact that a large breasted woman cannot wear a strapless bra. And, her thighs do touch.
I hope the trend ends soon. I’d rather go back to staring at female butts with ass antlers (tramp stamp tattoos) than boobs.
I wonder if this is the same romance marketing wisdom which says that the (female) readers insert themselves into the story as they read? If the big New York marketers think the readers want to have the heroine’s adventures, maybe they think the readers want to have her body too? And of course Everyone Knows that every woman in the world wants a couple of basketballs stuck to her chest. [cough]
Sort of along the same lines, though, I remember an online discussion some years ago about how many romance authors gave detailed descriptions of the heroine’s breasts — how big and round and firm they were, how prominent the nipples were, what exact color the areolas were, etc. This was the writers, not the cover artists or the marketers, so obviously those writers (and it was a LOT of writers) thought there would be some significant interest on the part of the reader.
Somehow the idea went around that romance readers are kind of obsessed with the heroine’s boobs, and it’s not a new idea, even if there’s a new manifestation of it now.
Angie
Breasts on a cover turns me off.
There I said it.
If they’re spilling out of a bodice or a bra, if their the focal point of the cover art, or you just can’t help but notice all that bosom I won’t buy the book at all.
Yes, I AM judging a book by its cover and I know I’ve missed out on a number of fabulous novels that were released with covers featuring maximum breastitude. Case in point: Susan Elizabeth Phillips’ Avon imprint of It Had to Be You. I love SEP, but that freakin’ cover turned me off! Yes, I know it was an accurate uh, portrayal of the heroine’s ample assets, but I waited to picked up the book later, once it had a new cover. And I loved it.
For me, less is always more.
I hadn’t really noticed either but I certainly prefer a hot male bod on my covers. My publisher has given me four of them so far.
And about the cover models on Shape magazine, I must saw a commercial on TV as I write this pushing an athletic shoe. The girl was so obviously a 98 pound starving model without an ounce of muscle on her legs I wondered if the ad makers really think women are that gullible.
If you want a really good magazine with fit models, try Oxygen instead. It rocks!
You know what I really like in a romance cover? Gorgeous clothes. And/or beautiful landscapes. In paintings, not photos. The more graphic a cover, the less likely I am to buy it.
I’m with Leah. The last few covers I thought were really stunning were historicals with the heroine in a fabulous gown, but it was the gown that caught my eye, not the cup size.
I have bought Christmas romances because the snow scene was so pretty.