Looks to me like someone at Harlequin made some mistakes while digitizing various books’ covers, and then no one thought to audit the company’s listings on Amazon and correct those mistakes. I figured someone mistakenly tried to stretch and squeeze a picture of the physical cover to fit a digital template, I looked over at the page for the original paperback, and well… this is what I found:
I’m not saying the original cover was necessarily good, but at the moment (since I can’t see that original cover), I don’t have any basis for comparison.
It looks better crafted and it’s going for a higher price than the ones with those other covers. Perhaps instead of “Don’t judge a book by its cover” we should say “As clothes make the man, so too does the cover make the book.”
Looks to me like someone at Harlequin made some mistakes while digitizing various books’ covers, and then no one thought to audit the company’s listings on Amazon and correct those mistakes. I figured someone mistakenly tried to stretch and squeeze a picture of the physical cover to fit a digital template, I looked over at the page for the original paperback, and well… this is what I found:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0373304544
I’m not saying the original cover was necessarily good, but at the moment (since I can’t see that original cover), I don’t have any basis for comparison.
It appears that this was the original cover — not good, but it got notably worse when digitized in the wrong proportions.
After looking into it further, I’ve also discovered this variant:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0263831167
It looks better crafted and it’s going for a higher price than the ones with those other covers. Perhaps instead of “Don’t judge a book by its cover” we should say “As clothes make the man, so too does the cover make the book.”