I'm befuddled by the growing trend of minimalist/abstract book covers within sci-fi and fantasy. Many of these covers give no indication at all to the content of the book.

What is going on?

A perusal of my local Barnes & Noble.

Admittedly, I don't have strong memories of the Culture series covers (except one with a chair on it ;] ), but these new ones are... I mean, I literally have no idea what this book is about from the cover. That is just absurd. These could be Winamp visualization plugins.

I suppose the Foundation cover is illustrating psychohistory? Or is it just vaguely supposed to look like an atom with it's orbits? Is it just a sort of association thing because ASIMOV's name kinda looks "atomic" in some way? What is this about?

I mean. I guess you have a sky. And I guess the sky looks deep. On the cover. Cool cool.

But Why?

Honestly, I don't know, and I would rather just complain than do any real research. I have some theories:

It is cheaper?

Maybe it just cost less to get a generic cover that looks like an e-vite to a small gallery showing? Are these being generated by AI? It occurs to me that maybe graphic designers are looking for work at this time (see AI), and that they are working at bottom basement prices relative to an artist?

They want something timeless?

Maybe by going minimalist, the publisher feels that they might be able to release a look-and-feel for a book that will better stand the test of time? The less detail provided, the less something can ever look dated, the less it can ever be out of style?

I'm not sure I buy this. I have a feeling that these will age just as poorly as, if not more poorly than, any other cover design.

Does it show better on mobile?

Maybe the new covers are being optimized for high visibility on mobile? They know people are unlikely to be in the actual bookstore looking at the book itself. They are probably choosing to purchase it on a mobile device? Maybe minimal detail helps with catching attention in some way? Higher contrast in general?

Aside: Other failure modes

I picked these 3 because I think it is an example of covers that are almost anti minimal, but that still fail. There is too much visual noise on the page, and none of it seems that important. I don't think I could associate any cover with any particular book of James S.A. Corey's Expanse series.

Older and Contemporary Good Covers

I picked this as an example of an older book cover that at least show some thought put into them.

You look at Anathem, and you say "Ah, this will be something about monkish people, maybe in a cloister or something?" It is such a minimal amount of information, but whenever I see this cover, even without the author or title, I will still associate it with Anathem. A cover should allow you to recognize the book without any wording on it. Tell me, can you visualize the cover to Hyperion without looking it up? What if I just showed you the image, would you be able to name the novel? I bet you are thinking of a Shrike overlooking a boat on a sea of grass. That is a good cover.

Finally, I wanted to pick from at least one contemporary well done cover.

Let's set the scene.

I'm walking through a bookstore. My sightline is sliding across a book. I see "Gideon The Ninth". What is this? Well, it looks like a woman in kinda "Day of the Dead" facepaint who is holding a sword surrounded by skellies. Oh, and she is wearing aviators. Ok, that looks pretty cool. I then scan down and read "Lesbian necromancers explore a haunted gothic palace in space!" Regardless of your taste, you immediately know the ideas, the setting, and probably can infer the vibe from just the cover and a small bit of text. This is a cover that sparks interest, that is immensely recognizable, and that does some job of conveying the content of the book.

Why are we giving this up?