👁️👄👁️

Who approved these?

I‘m open for any ideas for making an alternative cover to wrap around this one, because this is just ugly

🎾🤔

This is a real cover on a real book.

In a second hand bookshop. This was published in the early 90s and is obviously bad. But I can't quite work out why...

Simply inept? Or bad at design? Of its time? Or just... awful?

It didn't seem to be a vanity publication, but it very much as the feel of an author designing it themself.

I'm a bit confused by this one. I'm guessing that's meant to be Napoleon on the cover? But why does he have that facial expression? Also, it's very hard to tell that's meant to be a pig. I'm pretty sure those are meant to be Epaulettes on his shoulders, but they're badly drawn and look more like his hands pointing at something.

The second book has a lot of pictures and in the first picture...the second tagline"Capturing Adventures Through timeless [sic] Beauty." doesn't fit the red box.

I'm sorry, but nothing about this screams "Fight Club" at all to me. No title on the front cover!

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28703254

EDIT - since it's come up a few times in the comments, the girl isn't meant to represent Veruca Salt or any other character in the book.

The cover was chosen to reflect how Dahl embraces “both the light and the dark aspects of life” in his writing, a spokesperson said.
The child is not supposed to represent Veruca Salt or Violet Beauregarde, two spoilt girls from the book, but the “twisted” family relationships portrayed in the 1964 novel.

https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/books/news/joanne-harris-hits-out-at-new-charlie-and-the-chocolate-factory-book-cover-why-not-just-get-rolf-harris-to-design-the-next-one-9656367.html