Cover Theory: Putting a Face to it.

Here's a question for you: do you think it's a good idea, or a bad idea, to have character portraits - specifically clear, distinct faces - on book covers?

My current theory, which I'd welcome your thoughts on, is this:

I think I'm right in saying that readers tend (however consciously or subconsciously) to identify with the main character of the novel they're reading. In doing so - by picturing themselves in that lead role and mentally role-playing their way through the narrative - they increase their sense of identification and association with the book. Which is a Good Thing, yes?

But a face is a very strong indicator of personality and individuality. So if you put a face on a book cover, won't that create the sense of entity and persona for that character that's distinct and removed from that of the reader? And wouldn't that be a psychological obstacle to the identification of the reader with the character, and result in the lessening of the reader's involvement in the novel?

In which case, surely publishers should avoid portraying characters on the covers of their books? Particularly if it's one of the principle p.o.v. characters, and definitely if it's the main, first-person narrator of the story. Otherwise there's a risk that readers won't immerse themselves fully in the narrative, and won't form such a strong associative bond with the series, or with the author's ongoing body of work. Not such a Good Thing.

Or am I reading too much into the idea of automatic reader-as-character association?

I do know it's something that I tend to do. One of the (many) reasons I'm such a big fan of The Dresden Files (covers by Orbit, example to the right reflected throughout the series: no characters in evidence whatsoever) used to be that I just knew I'd look damn good in that duster coat... but when I read the last installment, I just saw the guy from the TV series (which creates an even bigger dissociation problem than a character on a book jacket, for obvious reasons) in my mind's eye. I was no longer reading the adventures of me-as-Harry-Dresden; I was watching a new TV episode in my head, instead.

Then again, not everyone will have the same subjective experience when reading a book as I do, obviously. And anyway, isn't the quality of the prose, the degree to which the descriptive writing evokes the sense of character, far more likely to generate a sense of deep involvement than any image on the cover?

I have to admit that it's been a personal bugbear of mine for years; one I do keep coming back to. And for now I'm still on the side of 'faces on covers = bad'.

But what do you think?