Looking at the list of my "book" pet peeves I see that I've left off the biggest one of all, the one that I really hate with all the heat of a thousand white hot suns but which seems to be ubiquitous. It's what I am told is called the "headless bodice," where a picture (photo, illustration, whatever) of (virtually always
) a woman is put on the cover of a book but she is only shown up to the chin or maybe just under the nose. It's as if only the outfit matters, not the person, and, while I suspect tha
t there are qu
ite a few different reasons (easier for the artist if it's an illustration, focus on the historical period if the book is set in the past), it just seems to me like a complete objectification, and I don't even consider myself a raging feminist. Not only do I find them offensive, but, while they may once have been different and eye-catching, by now they've been done to death. Not that the publishers probably care, but while I may get them from the library, I refuse to buy them.Note:
Interestingly enough, the portrait on the cover of Jane Boleyn
is actually of Jane Seymour, the woman who replaced Jane B.'s sister-in-law Anne Boleyn on the throne. I guess they just wanted a portrait of a woman from the right period and I think they credit it correctly, but that's just weird.