I think the otherwise pointless quote actually serves a purpose: Covering up a stock image watermark. See also the variant cover at Amazon:
(h/t David)
I think the otherwise pointless quote actually serves a purpose: Covering up a stock image watermark. See also the variant cover at Amazon:
(h/t David)
I agree with Hand Over Fist’s correction, however, a quote doesn’t mean dog doo-doo unless we know where it’s from. Did it come from a critic from the New York Times Book Review or from the author’s sister-in-law?
It clearly came from the author, Michael Ross. I mean, his name is right under it.
Maybe it’s the author’s own quote, anything to cover that awkward photo library text. Stock photos are generally cheap enough to just purchase it, if it’s what you need. Otherwise try Pixabay or Pexels.
Looks like the quote is actually covering up a Series thingie:
Out of Hand Series
Book 1
In which case the quote is an improvement, because it at least conveys something about the book.
On the other hand, removing the series text from the original cover would allow a more tastefully sized quote with a lesser photobombing quality.
I looked at the cover for Out Of Hand Series Book 2 followup Hand in Glove which has four quoted anonymous blurbs including “gripping all the way to the end” 🙂 The bottom three blurbs are shadowed, but the top blurb is more deeply shadowed and appears to be blotting something out like the Hand Over Fist cover.
If they are books of a series, why blot that out? Bad strategy. I have seen reviewers who got annoyed at buying a novel then realizing it was a prequel or sequel, when they would have willingly ordered both had they just known.
But paper beats rock.