You saw it here first! The cover art for C.W. Gortner’s next novel, The Confessions of Catherine de Medici (which releases 5/25/10):
Can we say, “FABULOUS?!” I just love the contrast! And the colors are actually much more vivid in the file I have saved to my computer, for some reason they’re appearing dulled down here in this image. I think this is a perfect cover for a novel about Catherine de Medici; elegant and sexy, with a hint of mystery.
What are your thoughts?
Objectively speaking, it's a lovely cover. But Catherine de Medici should be so lucky to look like that model, is all I can say. From the research I did on her for NOTORIOUS ROYAL MARRIAGES, she was short, squat, had an unattractive profile to say the least and had small, beady eyes and fleshy lips, which were not considered attractive in 16th c. France. Naturally, it would take a brave publisher to put an image of the real Catherine on a book cover. This cover is a bit like casting Emily Blunt as Queen Victoria — which we all know has happened.I wonder how Gortner describes Catherine physically in his novel. If she's as gorgeous as the woman on his cover, there would have been no need for Diane de Poitiers!But I'm the grumpy (just kidding, folks!!!) historical author who appreciates verisimilitude over glossy models.
P.S. It looks like the book should be titled "The Confessions of Catherine Zeta-Jones."
Lovely, lovely! I, for one, would rather look at this cover than a short, ugly one. But then again, at least there would be good reason for the missing head.
Lezlie
It's absolutely gorgeous!
… and I forgot to mention that the dress looks like a bridesmaid's dress from the 1980s — not 16th c. at all! It's got short sleeves, even.I hear that Gortner is an amazing writer and I can't wait to read everything he's written; I hope this cover sells books for him, because, yeah, it's probably true that an actual painting of the real Catherine, a plump, homely woman in accurate clothing may not grab readers as much as a Victoria's Secret model in a 1980s bridesmaid's dress.
I think the cover is gorgeous and love the dark with the light. But I have to agree with Leslie that it looks nothing like Catherine. On the other hand, most of the time cover artists don't know much about the book when they do the artwork. I'm full of contradictions today. I can't wait for this book to come out.
Leslie, I do think the model bears a resemblance to Catherine Zeta-Jones, I see it in the lower face a bit! But I don't think she is waif-like as in Emily Blunt playing Victoria; that is more drastic than this model playing a young Catherine – she is at least busty here. I also like the way she holds her head, and how her dress is positioned to look like she's just spun around very quickly, it adds a mysterious quality to give off that Catherine-vibe. I'm sure it was done to add sex-appeal and make a statement, which of course in turn sells books. Knowing Gortner's tenancy to utilize every known historical detail about his protagonists, my guess is that the writing itself won't romanticize Catherine's true appearance. It doesn't bother me that the model isn't dressed in 16th c. garb…I think her dress looks like a modernized version of the style, with the elaborately embellished bodice and heart neckline (very IN right now). I can see why it might be controversial but I see this more as an edgy fashion shot–the background makes me think of a what a de Medici-inspired runway show or fashion ad campaign might look like. It has a very artsy feel, which I like. Gortner's Last Queen paperback cover art had a similarly high fashion aura to it. The bright red background in this one is gorgeous; I think the lighting and the imagery is amazing!Lezlie – I too would prefer this cover over a portrait of the real Catherine! I think the intent was to evoke a sensual side from Catherine's story, even if she herself looked anything but sexy in real life.Hi Daphne, I agree!!
dolleygurl, I agree with what everyone is saying about it not looking like Catherine, but I think it gives the cover a certain intensity and sense of drama. Leslie is right though, that if Catherine had looked this good in real life, there would have been no Diane de Poitiers!!
Well, I think the cover is lovely! I don't expect historical accuracy from covers at all, given that most cover artists probably know very little about the subjects in question. It just never happens, sometimes not even on non-fiction. What's inside is far more important, the outside just gets us to pick it up and have a look. =)
When I first saw this cover, in a larger version, I actually gasped, delightedly so. It just took my breath away. As an author of historical fiction myself — like C.W., constantly arguing and grappling with publishers' art departments — I saw the total sense in what they had come up with for CONFESSIONS. Gortner's historical research, not to mention his writing, are to my discerning eye, perfection. But like it or not, SEX SELLS (as does fashion). And at the end of the day, we authors want to sell books. I say bravo to this cover.
Thanks, everyone, for your comments about the cover for my new book. I think a little controversy is a good thing and I must admit, I really like this cover, too. Yes, the model may not resemble Catherine but in my opinion that's not the point of a cover: the point is to evoke the period, convey a sense of the content, attract a potential reader. In these respects, the cover artist has done a fantastic job!In the book itself, I describe Catherine as she was described by the Venetian ambassador, who saw her during her young womanhood, several years after her arrival in France. I chose not to rely on most of the other descriptions, the majority of which were penned by detractors, who sought to persuade Francois I to dissolve his son's marriage to Catherine in favor of another bride – invariably one whom the detractor was recommending! One can't read the other accounts and assume Catherine was unattractive. She probably wasn't a beauty, but the 16th century's ideal of beauty was quite different from ours. Remember, Anne Boleyn was often described as being "too thin, of no discernible breast, sallow and goggle-eyed." Others went as far as to call her a "hag."Finally, if we look at extant pen and ink sketches of Diane de Poitiers, believed to have been done by Clouet from life, we'll see a rather less striking woman than her idealized portraits. Diane knew how to manipulate her image for maximum impact, and, in some ways, now Catherine gets to exercise the same privilege on my book cover.I like to think of it as a little divine retribution
Hi Meghan, and congrats again on your wedding!
And I certainly agree with you this is the type of cover that will draw people in and get them to pick up this book! I love the raw drama of it. Knowing C.W.’s work to likewise be incredible and full of drama, I just know that the books content will be what gets the most attention. But it’s still fun to ooh and aah at this delicious piece of artistic eye candy!Robin, I agree with you 100%. I myself let out a squeal of delight when I first looked at this cover; my boyfriend Ron was sitting on the opposite couch and thought there was something wrong with me!! And being an ex-fashion PR girl myself, I think the high fashion edginess of this cover is just divine, or dare I say, fierce! It reminds me of one of the Renaissance-inspired Leibovitz shoots from Vogue. I also adore the dress Juana is wearing in the Last Queen paperback cover, it’s very de la Renta, IMHO. And the flaming red hair billowing out behind her is the icing on that most delectable cake.
Hi C.W.
so glad you stopped by – I think this is the modernized historical fiction cover many cover artists strive for, but rarely achieve. As Robin said, bravo! Way to make a statement that history can be hot! And I agree with you that some controversy is a good thing. It seems fitting to me, actually; after all, your book’s subject matter was herself quite the controversial woman! I’ve always been a Diane de Poitiers fan (hey, Confessions may yet convert me to Catherine’s side!), and had not considered that DDP may not have truly been the striking beauty she is presented to be in most portraits. Portraits were of course, meant to flatter the subject—especially if that sitter also happened to be favorite to a king. And I suppose even in the 16th century, ladies followed the same beauty mantra as we do today: “play up your best assets.” One of the things I love about your work is that you give a voice to the much-maligned women of history, and I am so excited to finally see Catherine portrayed in a more sympathetic light in historical fiction. There has been a flurry of anti-Catherine hist-fic released this past year, none that I’ve read, but I take it your point of view on this strong, controversial lady will be quite refreshing; divine retribution indeed!
Allie ~ I, too, am very anxiously awaiting this book, but have you read Jeanne Kalogridis' The Devil's Queen? Despite the title, she also is very sympathetic in her portrayal of Catherine.Lezlie
I can forgive the no-relation-to-ol'-Cate-in-the-looks-department. But will they stop it with the half a head thing???? Drives me nuts.I've even not picked up a HF book in the past because of covers featuring headless women.I love Gortner's writing, though, so you know I'll read this anyway. But dang those headless woman illustrators….I think they have latent hostility towards women.
It's fiction and if it's going to be mainstream historical fiction that sells, then it needs a cover like this – if the author wants to build a profile and stay in a paying job. That's the way it is. Brutal marketing fact. For my latest jacket as yet unseen but in the pipeline, my publishers have hired a top fashion model for the photo shoot and a gorgeous dress.In the past I have moaned about lack of absolute historical accuracy on my covers, but since then, I managed to get over myself and have come to understand that it's about selling to the reader and that one needs a touch of the theatrical or the film poster. It's about getting the reader to pick the thing up in the first place. Chris Gortner, if you are reading this, I loved The Last Queen. I think the new cover is terrific and I hope it sells by the shop-load.
Love it, so fitting compared to the Last Queen's cover art. Sex does sell and I think it turned out breath taking.
Lezlie – How did you like Jeanne Kalogridis's take on Catherine? I've read two of her other books, The Borgia Bride and I, Mona Lisa. I know she likes to play fast and loose with facts, which is fine since it's fiction–a friend of mine and fellow blogger started reading The Devil's Queen and said she had to put it down because she thought Catherine's character was too "wimpy". I'm all for showing her in a sympathetic light, but Catherine was a genuinely strong woman (though everyone is entitled to moments of weakness, it's human nature) and I don't know that I would find Kalogridis's Catherine believable, if she is as wimpy as my friend tells me. But what did you think? I'm going to head over to Books 'N Border Collies now to see if you reviewed it.Michele – I do always find it a bit eerie when they make the historical ladies into headless horsemen, especially when the subject is Marie Antoinette, Mary Queen of Scots, Anne Boleyn, or any other truly beheaded historical character. But I think part of it from an editorial perspective is not wanting to give a distinct face to a famous historical person, and leave a bit of a what if? factor in the mix. And this book cover trend seems to work–they're selling books for a reason, so I suppose we will continue to see half-headed women on historical fiction covers until purchasing trends change.Elizabeth, I definitely think Christopher has built himself a "profile" with his covers, and continuity and consistency is important for any type of marketing. it's good to have one's own style and recognizablity readers can identify with the author. It's interesting that you liken book covers to film posters — I agree that there needs to be that inherent showmanship factor with both. I look forward to seeing your latest jacket currently in the works!
Just to throw more insight into the situation, when the paperback of The Last Queen was picked up by a big box retailer, one of the reasons they chose it was the cover. They said, they wanted covers that featured women, movement, and no faces. The partial face phenomenon we're seeing currently (the headless and semi-headless lady) is directly fueled by this. Also, full faces are challenging from a marketing perspective. Unless you're using a well known model or actress who has face-recognition or familiarity, then readers can be turned off by the face of someone they don't like, don't think is pretty or is too pretty, etc. Just think about what attracts us to a person initially, how we react to faces when we meet someone. When it comes to selling books, this is a big risk to take, so we see partials which hint at the unseen. It's understandable, from a strict marketing perspective, once you understand it. I recently took a stroll through a bookstore looking for full faces on book covers of any genre. Try it some time. There are very few to be found except for illustrations on fantasy and sci-fi novels.
Allie ~ I liked Kalogridis' version of Catherine, but since I had only read "evil Catherine" books previously, I just enjoyed the different point of view without examining it too closely.
Lezlie
I like the dress/background but I find it interesting/weird that I have such an opposite reaction to headless covers as the typical book buyer. These covers do nothing but frustrate and annoy me as I want to see the whole picture! Not a chopped up closeup of the dress!
If they are going to hide the face I'd rather a full view from the back or the side…. not half a picture. Hope trends change someday. The book itself does sound interesting!
I love it! For some reason (the red, the swirls) I keep thinking of Spain and flemenco. Hmm..