Attacking Oz

In the same vein as my last post (looking at the difference between American and Russian covers of Russian novels), I wanted to compare multiple covers of a well-known fantasy: The Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum.

Actually, I was looking for colour themes in fantasy novels, including The Wizard of Oz, when I came across this cover and decided to write about it instead:

Source

I was appalled. Yes, the cover is attractive, and yes, it relates to to the story (because of the scene in the field of poppies), but it leaves out so many essential elements of the plot. (Also, it makes it look like Oz is a story about opium, or maybe Remembrance Day, both of which are completely untrue.)

Take a look at the original cover. Without the title written on it (because those are kind of dead giveaways), they would look like two opposite stories.

Source

Here are 3 problems I found in the "revamped" cover, which aren't present in the original:

1. A fantasy cover should look fantastic. This is a story about magic, and the author hasn't tried to surprise readers by suddenly revealing the magic. It's something that readers deserve to know from the cover.

2. The Wizard of Oz is a children's book. The minimal illustrations and sleek text of the poppy cover are designed to attract adults, and would repel children. The green original cover looks like fun to read (which is what it's meant to be!).

3. The cover should give something about the story away. There's a place for covers like the new one: in a mysterious story where the author only reveals tiny bits of the plot at a time, a mysterious-looking cover would be appropriate, because it would give readers an idea of what they were in for. As a Wizard of Oz cover, the poppy image is deceptive, because it makes the story look like something it isn't.

Next time I plan to do some more comparisons of covers of the same novel... So long until then!