There isn’t any. In covers, in films, in television, or in advertising.

Why?

My suspicion is that those who hold the financial reins in all of these industries a) lack imagination and creativity of their own; b) seldom recognize those talents in others; c) lack the courage to lead, waiting, rather, until their market leans in a particular direction, at which point they all throw all their weight behind what is generally an anemic — if not incompetent — idea.

And so the rest of us view these covers, movies, “comedies”, and ads, decrying their poverty and outlining the missed opportunities for expression, beauty, wit, and communication. And, like Rostand’s Cyrano de Bergerac, we exclaim amongst ourselves:
“Such, my dear sir, is what you might have said,
Had you of wit or letters the least jot:
But, O most lamentable man!–of wit
You never had an atom….”

Covert art originality is so significant only because it’s an undeniable truth that most readers DO judge books by their covers. The cover should be striking and unique, or accurately reflective of the content, and spines and feet rarely are either.

But occasionally you do come across a beautiful cover. One of my favorites is 1Q84’s.

My second book has a cover like what you’re suggesting (I know! Lucky twice!)…it does have my character’s face, but they’ve done fun things with colour, and also because there’s a cult in my book, they’ve done tiny Bible verses. It’s great! http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12033463-the-right-and-the-real

Personally, I don’t know how anyone thinks of a cover design, but I’m very grateful for the good ones. Brodie Ashton’s Everneath is one of my favourite recent ones. And also, I bought Rapture Practice partially because the cover is so bright and interesting.

You can see it in book titles as well. The most prominent one being “The [title]’s [relationship].” The Time Traveler’s Wife. The Tiger’s Daughter. The Kitchen God’s Wife. The Memory Keeper’s Daughter. These in particular bug me because they’re all about framing women’s identities as attached to someone else, generally a man.

I think the point of doing this is to attach a particular title to something that is already popular and has already worked. This book is similar to that one and might appeal to the same audience, so let’s use similar visual cues or a title that reminds readers of that other book.

But it becomes detrimental when everyone jumps on the bandwagon. And yes, it’s totally unoriginal and derivative and annoying.