Our cover snark is all about tats. As you can see on the cover of Blood Rights, Chyrsabelle is covered with tattoos and they are a symbol of her status as an extremely valuable comarré. My problem is not that Chyrsabelle has tats, the problem is that you can see her tats. Throughout the book, Painter goes to great lengths to ensure that it is clearly understood that these tats are not to be seen. They are reserved for the vampire that owns the blood rights of the comarré .
We can only see the tats in question because Chrsyabelle is wearing a backless and shoulderless dress. Yes, this is yet another example of not matching up with the plot. While Chrsyabell does dress in all white, she certainly would never choose to wear anything so revealing and would see that dress as a complete negation of the vows that she took when she became comarré, but then why bother with a little thing like making sure the cover represents the story when the opportunity exists to show a little skin.
This cover completely negates everything that Painter set up in her story. It’s enough to make me wonder if the publisher even read the story before choosing the cover art. It’s all about what sells, and certainly not about what’s accurate.

Now, if I remember how Mercy is described in the book, she has 1 tattoo. A little coyote paw on her lower stomach. So this? I’ve no idea what this is, Is it adjusted to make her look sexy? Or is it blue collar coding to show she’s a mechanic? (After all, pictures of her almost wearing a boilersuit or carrying a wrench are not uncommon) Or did the cover artist escape his cage and managed to scribble random ink (and remove most of her clothing) before he could be restrained?
We can only see the tats in question because Chrsyabelle is wearing a backless and shoulderless dress. Yes, this is yet another example of not matching up with the plot. While Chrsyabell does dress in all white, she certainly would never choose to wear anything so revealing and would see that dress as a complete negation of the vows that she took when she became comarré, but then why bother with a little thing like making sure the cover represents the story when the opportunity exists to show a little skin.
This cover completely negates everything that Painter set up in her story. It’s enough to make me wonder if the publisher even read the story before choosing the cover art. It’s all about what sells, and certainly not about what’s accurate.

Now, if I remember how Mercy is described in the book, she has 1 tattoo. A little coyote paw on her lower stomach. So this? I’ve no idea what this is, Is it adjusted to make her look sexy? Or is it blue collar coding to show she’s a mechanic? (After all, pictures of her almost wearing a boilersuit or carrying a wrench are not uncommon) Or did the cover artist escape his cage and managed to scribble random ink (and remove most of her clothing) before he could be restrained?
