Is there any reason to have one? Some books have them, others do not. What is your preference? On other books? On your own? Personally I'm so and so regarding this. On one hand, people can see your eyes and perhaps a portion of your soul with a good photo. On the other hand, why would anyone care what you look like as long as your words are good? I will probably do what my publisher tells me (if that ever happens, ha!). If I self-publish... yeah I will add a photo so people can see my mug, and I will try not to look too psycho on it. What about you?
Oh, hell, no, I don't want my photo on anything nor do I want my soulful eyes exposed to the world at large. I believe it was Georgia Bonesteel who once used a photo of herself half hidden by a big tree and huge sunglasses. I like that idea except I might hide behind a big dog or a giant rosebush..
Rosebush gave me an idea... I will put a single rose behind my ear so it sticks out near my forehead, and make sure I cut myself on the rose needle so that blood trickles down the side of my cheek. And smile profusley, together with big wide soulful eyes. That will grab someones attention!
Some publishers will request you provide a photo after they accept your work. This is true for novels, but it also can be true for publishing with some journals and magazines. Personally, I like seeing what an author looks like. At the same time, I've never given it all that much thought. If a publisher does want a photo, I will take a few selfies and send along the one that most makes me look like a writer and someone to take seriously.
The photo is for readers to judge the author based on their appearance, I guess. What else could it be for? I hate the idea of a photo of me being anywhere. But I guess there are worse things I would agree to in order to get published
It does appear to be a branding thing. Absolutely the photo is there for judging, and the people who see it will care whether they admit it or not. All part of the sale. Does it have to be you, though? Maybe not...
I don’t want my readers (friends excepted) to know what I look like. I write some controversial stuff; I’m already mentioned by name on a website of a magazine that’s fairly big in the poetry world, and I’ve got a bad reputation among their readers for what I write. The funny thing is, they didn’t say anything about me that isn’t true!
Why couldn't somebody work with an AI and come up with a proxy character to represent them visually? It's basically what's being done all over Instagram already with endless filters. Maybe an AI-perfectified version of yourself.
I think the photo is to foster loyalty. Readers feel like they know the writer and therefore supporting them on a more personal level. I'm not crazy about the idea as I like my privacy. And in this day and age of cancel culture I don't want someone confronting me in public because they didn't like what I wrote.
Well you'd be able to decide on things like that. Using photoshop you can leave the skin untouched and just change facial shape if you want, or whatever. I'm assuming AI would let you do something similar, though I don't know. But what I was saying was to create a character to represent you, not necessarily using your own face. Just as the narrator is sort-of the author, but is actually a character. Sort of like the way we use little avatar pictures here on the site to represent ourselves. But then that would be devious and deceptive and go against the whole point of putting the author's picture on the book.
Yes, this. An image compels an emotional response. Doesn't always work as intended, for example when politicians and other creepy salespeople try it.
Depends on if you've got that unique look that actor talent seeks out, or if you've been doxxed or something. Otherwise I personally wouldn't be too worried. I look so underwhelmingly average that I'm very commonly mistaken for other people. If I wrote something notorious enough to warrant public confrontation, which admittedly seems unlikely, I'd feel bad for all the other shmucks that look like me.
Photos on dustjackets are a real hangover from 20th century publishing practices when those were the only real visual images you could get of authors so you could try and connect with who they are a bit. These days it's less important because we can constantly connect, albeit in a more contrived way, and get that information from the internet if we want it. Some genres have that style so historically ingrained in them though that I would utilise it if I was publishing in those areas. Romance and Crime are two that particularly spring to mind. Maybe it's because they're two genres that can be really scandalous and dig right into people's psyches so they want to know more about the person who could imagine that, including what they look like? I work in a library part time and I do spend a lot of time watching people and trying to study what they pick up and get an idea of why... Just can't help it!
