OnlineBookClub.org

I agree with the marketing strategy as da Vinci captures many attention and interests as mine.

Titles are not always much related to the story, not because it might be a strategy to sell, but because it is an idea you should start the book with. That's my opinion, that the title should give you a feeling to keep in mind when you read, but it is not what the story is really about.

I think it definitely was a marketing strategy. While it may not have directly aimed to capitalise on the fame of The DaVinci Code, I think it's likely trying to capitalise on the fame of DaVinci in general.

Da Vinci is a very famous name that would attract the attention of millions of people to a book. I do not see anything unethical about using the name in the title. Besides, I think the author's creativity enabled the name to fit well as part of the title.

The popularity of da vinci and the art based plot would make it appropriate for the book to bear his name. The name is almost a byword for anything artistic and popular in the modern context.

Dael Reader wrote: ↑03 Jun 2018, 10:00 I wouldn't say there's anything unethical about it. The name is in the title because the "alleged" missing painting by da Vinci is a thread that holds the storylines together.

That's common thread as I understood it as well, but I have yet to read the book, so I don't have an informed opinion.

It's definitely a marketing ploy, as is the first line in Amazon's blurb: "In the spirit of The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown". It's certainly meant to suggest that the book will appeal to readers who liked Dan Brown's book. It why I got the book.

Of course, I assumed it was hyperbole, that it would not be up to Brown's caliber. Probably better that they didn't try to match his writing style. Better to copy the title than the book.

Marketing strategy? Unethical? Nooooooooo......
By marketing 'strategy' do we mean just presenting the item to the market will not get the monetary gain looked for, so therefore we must have a 'strategy' to counteracting this? Perhaps if we put a similar cover on a similar named book of high monetary income, we will um ...'entice' readers who would not normally buy this book...hmmm I dunno..is deceiving such a small segment of the population for monetary gain....unethical??
I just love how corporate jargon has wormed its way into everyday language and gets so easily passed over as being ok because it's just...
Thank you for this discussion starter. I feel whole heartedly that the book cover choice was unethical. The novel's name, while not fitting and a further pull on the deception, could be justified based on the story. I also feel if a phrase like 'marketing strategy ' has to be attached to something it is already, by that definition, unethical.

I believe using Da Vince's name is just a marketing strategy, however, I'm not sure if it's ethical or not because I'm not sure who is going to give the author the consent.

I don't see anything unethical with that. The name draws attention of the reader to the book, which is a good thing.

cristinaro wrote: ↑04 Jun 2018, 07:57 You may be right about that, but think of the resemblance between the cover of this book and that of Dan Brown's book. Such a resemblance coupled with da Vinci's name in the title induces the idea that the two books are similar. In this case, fans of Dan Brown would be quick to check it out. I did the same only to discover they are completely different in terms of the writing style as well as character and plot development. This is the reason why I called it a potential marketing strategy and I wondered whether it was ethical or not.

I think it is definitely a marketing strategy. I thought about this as well. Could the author have used a different title to describe the book? If so, would we have been as interested to read it? I don't think so. I think the cover and the title are clearly meant to draw readers in. I know we are not supposed to judge a book by its cover and title, but with so many books on the market, the first glance is all we have to go on many times when deciding on our next read. Fortunately, with websites such as this, individuals can rely on reviews to help them make decisions on which book they want to invest time to read. I truly appreciate all the reviews, and I have downloaded books that I would have passed over had I not read the review.

Who knows? Maybe because of his art. But the author definitely knew she'd sell the book with that name on it.

Using Da Vinci's name is a great marketing strategy. His major connection to the story is that a painting by him is missing. That, in my opinion, is not enough to make him 'deserving' of being mentioned in the title, but it is a strategy that will help sell the book. I do not think it is legally unethical. However, I will not do it if I were the author.

Yes, I agree that the author might have used davinci's name as a marketing stategy to draw attention to his work , and I don't see anything unethical about that at all, as far as the contents of the book thereof is original.

It probably was a marketing strategy, but since Da Vinci is tied into the storyline I wouldn’t consider it unethical.