Anita Bensoussane wrote:Don't forget that George has previously tried to row the boat with just one long oar!
Er, good point. But at least she and the others looked like reasonably normal human beings (and Timmy like a reasonably normal dog) back then...
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I quite like the look of Kirrin Island actually, and Timmy is really cute (although obviously not like the proper Timmy but as drawings of animals go, he is cute), but the others look awful. If Julian and Dick swapped t-shirts Julian would be Where's Wally!!
Carlotta King wrote:If Julian and Dick swapped t-shirts Julian would be Where's Wally!!
Good point!
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I know I often go overboard about these modern illustrations - but really, it's only from an artistic viewpoint. As someone who isn't bad at drawing, I just find these designs a bit lacking. Whether the illustrator can't do any better, or they've been told to 'dumb down' their style to aim the books at younger children, I don't know, but they certainly wouldn't have attracted me as a child.
It's interesting to compare these with Betty Maxey, whom hardly anyone seems to like. As I said earlier, Betty Maxey's covers look like Rembrandt paintings compared to these latest covers. Though I'm no Big Fan of Maxey, I do appreciate that she could draw - and many of her covers are artistically brilliant, even if they aren't to everyone's taste. However, these new covers seem to be aimed at a much younger audience - seeming to prove that these days The Famous Five are aimed at the 5 - 7 age group, I would guess.
When I was a child my sister had the full library of Betty Maxey covers, and when I used to creep into her bedroom aged about 7 or 8 and take a look at them, I always rejected them because I felt they were aimed at much older children - maybe aged 10 - 12. The children on them looked like teenagers.
I like nearly every Famous Five illustrator from Soper to the modern 2010 abridged versions - because they all show human beings. I guess I must just be getting old, because I don't understand the appeal of the cartoon like figures publishers seem to favour nowadays. Unless, of course, the artists used don't charge as much.
'Oh voice of Spring of Youth
hearts mad delight,
Sing on, sing on, and when the sun is gone
I'll warm me with your echoes
through the night.'
I think the cover of the book is awful but it isn't me they're trying to sell it to. I don't like the depiction of Kirrin Island either, it's nothing like how I visualise it.
John Pickup wrote:I don't like the depiction of Kirrin Island either, it's nothing like how I visualise it.
I agree — it's not bad as an illustration (that part of it, anyway!), but it looks more like some sort of "Gothic" castle from a fantasy or horror story, not like I've ever imagined Kirrin Castle to be.
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
Kirrin island looks way too big as well - the castle looks like it is far away on a hillside, which makes the island look very big with tall mountains.
I guess I've never been a typical child, because even then I would have hated this. I only liked illustrations that depicted children as realistic child figures, so this style would have turned me off the books completely.
'Oh voice of Spring of Youth
hearts mad delight,
Sing on, sing on, and when the sun is gone
I'll warm me with your echoes
through the night.'
Rob Houghton wrote:I guess I've never been a typical child,
Of course you was, you liked Enid Blyton, didn't you?
I know what you mean though, I'm quite certain that I would have hated these covers when I was a young boy.
When I was little, I might not have minded a cover like that for silly, funny, wacky, not-to-be-taken-too-seriously kinds of stories. But I can't imagine it would have seemed right for the Famous Five, or for Enid Blyton books in general. Her stories can be amusing and light-hearted, but they're never wacky and absurd, and I've never associated that kind of artwork with any of them at all. Even her most famous series for pre-school-aged children — yes, I do mean Noddy — was illustrated with far more artistic flair and talent than most of these new covers for the Famous Five et al!
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I agree. I think my main objection to this type of cover is that they seem almost ashamed of Enid's traditional adventure-type storyline. They are cheating the kids in a way, by saying 'hey - this Enid Blyton story is whacky and fast-paced and just like Roald Dahl or David Walliams' when actually they are nothing like them. The publishers are obviously aiming towards a younger more frivolous market than these books were intended for.
I was mainly attracted to Enid's books because of the 'adult' covers that didn't belittle me, as a child. I hated being 'talked down to' with either text or illustrations - and Enid's books never used to do that.
'Oh voice of Spring of Youth
hearts mad delight,
Sing on, sing on, and when the sun is gone
I'll warm me with your echoes
through the night.'
John Pickup wrote:I don't like the depiction of Kirrin Island either, it's nothing like how I visualise it.
I agree — it's not bad as an illustration (that part of it, anyway!), but it looks more like some sort of "Gothic" castle from a fantasy or horror story, not like I've ever imagined Kirrin Castle to be.
Yeah I probably should've explained myself better, I like the island just as an illustration of an island, I agree its nothing like Kirrin Island should be or how I imagine it, I just like it as if it was a non-FF drawing. If I saw it somewhere not on a FF book I would think "oh that's quite nice".
However I don't like the kids, whether they're FF or were characters from another series altogether, I just don't like the cartoony style.
I'm like you Rob, I have always much preferred illustrations that look like real humans, even when I was a little girl.
Most of my FF books as as girl were the 80s Knight ones with Betty Maxey illustrations and the covers that look like members of Duran Duran but even though they weren't showing period clothes, at least they looked like real people, and the scenery on the covers was quite nice too.
I wouldn't have liked cartoony covers even back then!
Rob Houghton wrote:I agree. I think my main objection to this type of cover is that they seem almost ashamed of Enid's traditional adventure-type storyline. They are cheating the kids in a way, by saying 'hey - this Enid Blyton story is whacky and fast-paced and just like Roald Dahl or David Walliams' when actually they are nothing like them. The publishers are obviously aiming towards a younger more frivolous market than these books were intended for.
Yes, that's what I was thinking too. I always enjoyed Roald Dahl as well, but his style is completely different from Enid's and I wouldn't have expected the two authors to have anything like the same illustrators.
I wonder what convinces the current publishers that Enid's books need crazy cartoony covers? I simply do not accept the argument that "this is what appeals to young kids nowadays, so that's that" — I've said it elsewhere before, but there are plenty of books for children (including young ones) with much more naturalistic illustrations, and they obviously sell, or they wouldn't remain in print. I really do think the idea behind these current covers is something like: "It's Enid Blyton, it's easy pap, it's for kids who aren't interested in real literature and don't want to be challenged too much, it shouldn't appeal to anyone over the age of 7 (or if it does, they obviously aren't very smart)..." — basically, that these books are Not To Be Taken Seriously. Even if that's not what the publishers are consciously thinking, it's what their choices of cover styles very strongly suggest.
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
But at least she and the others looked like reasonably normal human beings (and Timmy like a reasonably normal dog) back then...
but even though they weren't showing period clothes, at least they looked like real people, and the scenery on the covers was quite nice too.
