A-Musing: Covers

I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but with comic books -- where the art is half of the experience -- one cannot help it.

Usually, comic book covers will be done by the same artist covering the interiors, but occasionally there will be a special guest artist, or even various variants to choose from. The cover is the comic's handshake in a way; its first impression which can often sway the indecisive reader.

But when it comes to trade collections, how do they choose what goes on the front? There's many covers, from each issue collected inside, to choose from; do they use the first issue's cover? Do they choose the nicest looking, and if so, who decides that? And what about those variants and guest artists? Do they even get a look-in?

Regardless of what goes on the front, each cover is normally showcased in the trade, often in a "cover gallery" at the back, or sometimes marking the beginning of each issue (which I prefer, as it differentiates "chapters"). So the artists in question get their due. Quite frankly, to omit the covers would lessen the value of the trade, in my opinion.

However, the question remains: Who chooses the covers, and what is this decision based on? To use the example that got me thinking this way in the first place, take the hardcover of Blackest Night, by Ivan Reis and Oclair Albert.

It's one of my favourite trade covers, and a very striking image, yet it is taken from issue number two. Not number one, or even number zero (included in this trade). Certainly, they made the best decision, but why? And isn't it careless and slightly arrogant to assume everyone will have the same tastes? Perhaps there are those who dislike this cover. They could excuse it if it were the first issue's cover, as that would have been a default choice, but there was obviously a conscious decision to highlight this cover over all the others.

There is also the matter of trade-exclusive covers; where a new cover is created especially for the collection. This creates the impression that the story is something very special, and can enhance the sentimental quality of the trade somewhat. Take the George Perez/Alex Ross cover to DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths. Beautifully detailed, but not exemplary of the artwork within. Is this a bad thing?

Personally, I do not think so, but then there are times where unique covers can fail. The covers to Watchmen and Marvels do not reflect the amazing quality of those stories. They are almost deliberately simplistic when compared to what lies within.

Okay, so maybe these are artistic choices, but this brings me back to my original head-scratcher: Why these covers? I'd love to know the stories behind some of these decisions, and others like them, but I imagine they are not always so interesting.

I think I've covered all my main points...