Oh dear. This looks like a classic example of a loss of confidence in a good idea. So many elements are competing for our attention that it’s impossible to get any sense of what the book’s actually about.

The central image is a good one, suggesting an intriguing combination of loneliness, imprisonment and childhood. This immediately gives us some clues as to the nature and tone of the story. If we were allowed to linger on this image alone, we would start to use our imagination to piece together a dark, scary narrative. The image is also very small in relation to the rest of the cover, which should make it look lost and vulnerable.

But both these opportunities for clever communication have been lost. The publisher has clearly decided that readers won’t “get” the darkness of the story from this image alone, so have slapped on a generic “horror” graduated border. But rather than making this more spooky, it smothers the image, both distracting the eye from it and lessening the sense of its vulnerability. It also makes it much more hard to spot the book on a busy shelf.

The dominant border also fights with the title. If this rather delicate font were allowed space to breathe, it would help to communicate fragility and fear - here, though, it just looks weak and recessive.

And finally, the Niffenegger quote is far, far too long -  it fights uncomfortably with all the other messages  and so should go on the back. The “read in one sitting” quote should just go. That type of review always makes a book sound inconsequential and frothy — the opposite of what this cover is trying to communicate.

This cover needs stripping down to its (very strong) essentials — the image and the title/author. Together they can give us everything we need, kick-start our imagination and make this book look different and compelling.