This is not a cover image

It really should not be difficult to produce an aesthetically competent cover when publishing a book on Foucault. With his polished dome, polo neck and intense yet playful gaze, Foucault was born to be the poster boy for his own cult following far more than Deleuze, Nietzsche or Kant. And if a photo is not forthcoming then there are plenty of other appropriate ways to represent his thought visually - surely?

So why then are the so many appalling covers? Today’s blog is a celebration of just a few:





A personal favourite - it is as if someone vomited rainbow spaghetti all over the worst photo of Foucault ever taken.

This doesn’t even look like Foucault. And his hands seem too small.

I don’t think Foucault’s thought bubbles would be yellow.

Why do these illustrated guides have the worst covers given their focus on, er, graphics. Overdesigning or something.

It’s actually quite sweet that someone actually went and tried to draw Foucault’s face in the sand…or sad.

False advertising. This makes the debate look like some kind of love-in.

Shameless.

Severe, unforgiving title font. Horrible green cover. Pointless graphic.

Foucault as mise-en-abime.

There is no greater violence than the atrocity of this cover.

Aaaaaargh. No.

Can Routledge not afford to pay graphic designers?

I find this quite scary.

Adventures in photoshop

To what extent is squashing your face against some glass really an act of self-transformation?

Line drawing Foucault looks bored and he only has to be on the cover.