New FFO Covers

[Nick]

Not sure if a thread has already been posted with regards to this but next Monday sees the launch of new covers for 4 of the FFO series.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/ma ... dteenagers

[Wayne Pyer]

What a disappointment. Big shock that they've been updated. Not. It's nice to see them relaunched but would they update dickens or christie. Double standards me thinks.

[Tony Summerfield]

I don't remember what it came under, but we had a thread on this, Nick, when it was first announced several months ago. Whether they actually get published next Monday is another matter. I have been keeping my eyes open for them but as yet they have not been announced on the Egmont website. They will appear in the Cave of books when I first see them, but as shops seem to have a plentiful supply of the current covers we may not see them for a while on the shelves.

I don't think that they are updating the books though, Wayne, it is just the covers and this has always been done every few years anyway.

[SecretJenny]

I'm surprised they're using photos of real children when there's not an accompanying TV series. It seems a little strange, especially as the children on the cover won't bear much resemblance to the descriptions in the text, particularly Fatty.

[Nick]

I'm surprised they're using photos of real children when there's not an accompanying TV series. It seems a little strange, especially as the children on the cover won't bear much resemblance to the descriptions in the text, particularly Fatty.

Similar to the SS covers in the late 70's/early 80's - how I bugged my mother to find out when that TV series had been on.......

[Moonraker]

I'm surprised they're using photos of real children when there's not an accompanying TV series.

When you get to my age, nothing surprises any more.

[Nick]

Hi all,

One for collectors this - the new covers are now in stock at Waterstone, Harrogate.

All the best,

[tix]

I used the link very kindly put in by the person called Nick and I was saddened. First of all when I observed five children who are supposed to be the Find-Outers standing in a field, I was encouraged a little because the field is presented exactly as I imagine fields would have looked when the little detectives roamed them. Then I turned my attention to the children and couldn’t figure out who was who (or whom was whom) because they are all dressed as boys yet two of them have long hair. Presumably the one holding the dog is meant to be Fatty because Buster belonged to him and I also remember Mrs. Trotteville remarking about the length of her son’s hair - not realizing that Fatty wanted it long because it helped him with his disguises. Looking at them again it’s quite mystifying because I’m sure the original dog was a Scottie, and Fatty was fat so could the picture be of the Famous Five with a young Timmy? Probably not because the article is all about the Find-Outers so I’ll have to put that one on hold.

The girl in the green shirt is probably Daisy and then there are two smaller boys who are about the same size so one of them could be Pip – possibly the kid on the right who’s taking his trousers off for another photograph. The boy second from left is wearing a flowery shirt so unless he’s a little odd, he might be a “she” and therefore could be Bets with her hair tied behind in a bun. Is that Larry on the very left? In those days you were always being told to take your hands out of your pockets but unfortunately standards seem to have dropped over the years. It’s possible they’ve put the wrong photo with the article because I’ve always looked on Fatty as larger than life so if there’d been at least one fat person and perhaps a couple of them wearing frocks it would have made identification a little easier.

[Tony Summerfield]

You obviously missed the discussion on these books under Egmont books. I posted a picture of Burnt Cottage there and all four books can be seen in the Cave. I've got to say that I like the covers and the books look even better in the 'flesh'. They are a huge improvement on the covers that they are replacing. Only the first four so far, but the next four will come in March next year.

[tix]

I missed most of the letters in “Egmont Books” Tony so I’ve gone back and taken a look. I can see your point about the necessity of appealing to modern kids but it seems to me that in this new age where tokenism is rife, it’s rather odd that Fatty has been slimmed down and, for that matter, there’s no one wearing glasses.

If the children were represented more accurately, not only would the images be wholly acceptable to those who grew up with the books but they’d also be in line with the “essence” of Blyton. Further, I think they’d appeal to the youngsters of today because reality would be reflected. Not all people are slim and there are still those girls around who want to look feminine.

I haven’t seen any of the books but I read that the scripts hadn’t been changed. Am I right about that because there are several passages I thought had been censored?

[Anita Bensoussane]

I haven’t seen any of the books but I read that the scripts hadn’t been changed. Am I right about that because there are several passages I thought had been censored?

The text hasn't been updated any further for the new editions, but it retains the updates made in the 1990s.

The publishers seem to have gone out of their way to make it difficult to identify the children (it says in the article that the children weren't allocated set parts). Personally, however, I'd find it more satisfying to know who each child is meant to be! The one holding the dog looks like a girl to me - most likely Daisy as she is considerably taller than the girl second from left, who is probably Bets. The boys on either end of the line could be Larry and Pip, I suppose, though I'd be hard put to it to say which is which. That means the slightly stockier figure (though certainly not fat) in the middle would be Fatty, though the jacket and hairstyle are confusingly girly-looking.

Anita

[Lucky Star]

I agree with Anita's line up. They dont really look like my idea of the Find-Outers at all but I suppose that if the covers appeal to modern kids then thats good as it means that the stories, the Number one consideration, remain in print. The child holding the dog is quite definitly a girl though. I dont know how you thought it was Fatty.

I do think they could have found a slightly fatter child to be Fatty though. God knows there are enough overweight kids around these days and you make a good point in that all those overweight children would probably be quite encouraged to see that they dont have to look slim and beautiful to be the leader of the gang.

[Rob Houghton]

in this absurdly PC world, I'm amazed they havent renamed 'Fatty' something more 'appropriate' in the modern imprints

[Fiona1986]

in this absurdly PC world, I'm amazed they havent renamed 'Fatty' something more 'appropriate' in the modern imprints

For example renaming him Simon Lee Ian Morrisson?

[tix]

Anita Bensoussane said: "The text hasn't been updated any further for the new editions, but it still retains the updates made in the 1990s."

*****************

Thanks for that. It’s handy to know and I’m wondering to what extent the changes were implemented in the 1990’s but I suppose anyone could take a fairly accurate guess. I know that some of them have been reported in this forum.

The publishers could be committing commercial suicide if they took note of all the observations and demands made by the older brigade but it’s good to exchange ideas about the pictures that appear on the new book covers. The owners of the copyright do their market analysis and required research that tells them exactly how they should proceed but will the “real” Enid Blyton eventually disappear? There are dedicated societies and even departments existing that make it their goal to ensure the original works of a particular author will not ultimately vanish and in this case The Enid Blyton Society is fulfilling that need so all credit to the people who run it. If it wasn’t for the interest that exists, the Blyton essence could, theoretically, go the way of the dodo. Take the Find-Outers for example – if the time comes when a dedicated regime takes over, there might be more revisions to ensure that the right message gets across to the children.

“No guns allowed.” The mention of them may encourage antisocial desires amongst certain people when they learn that pointing a revolver at someone may bring them untold rewards.

“Making fun of a policeman is out.” It’s degrading and detrimental to the respect that society must hold for the law.

“The word ‘Fatty’ may not be used as a name.” No explanation needed.

“Children aren’t to be involved in the running down of criminals.” Copycat action could encourage recklessness and danger to life and limb.

“It is essential that young people are truthful.” The boy Frederick has no Uncle Horatius and is therefore lying.

One could fill in their own examples and scores of them would emerge as one wades through the various books (“It’s plain insulting to class Claudine as a person without honour because of her French nationality”). With the Blyton essence (and the books of other authors) altered beyond recognition the pictures of the characters would also follow suit and in the latter case it’s already happening. I can’t recall seeing a photograph of the Find-Outers before so it was good to read what one or two of the forum members think of the current offering.

Nice-looking children but they could be any characters in any book. I created a mental image of what I would have liked to see bearing in mind that every one of us has our own idea of how the Find-Outers should look and the way I picture Larry, for example, may be completely contrary to that of another Enid Blyton Fan. To be fair, the person who "Okayed" the photograph would have his or her own view as well.

The Find-Outers actually lend themselves to pleasing both camps because they contain a skinny boy and a fat boy. It seems that the PC mentality has completed the full circle because I’m sure that if strict adherents to the creed had been consulted they would have insisted that there be at least one fat kid in the group and perhaps a boy or girl of a different race. I could suggest other requirements but that may offend the very people who need appeasing so I won’t continue.

Boy on left: If he is Larry, then couldn’t he be a little taller, after all he was older than Fatty (once or twice). His hairdo looks right and if his clothes were changed to fifties vintage – would that be so unappealing to current consumers? One has to remember the players are icons, which must add to their appeal, and there’s a certain air of ‘authenticity’ around characters that are true to their origins. Look at Robin Hood, who is a great favourite with children - has he had a change of clothes?

Girl second from left: Bets presumably. She could be smaller and perhaps clad in rompers, or in a dress with a jumper. Her face looks all right but she could let her hair down.

Boy next to her: He’s the most important of all so particular attention should have been awarded him. Who is he? No doubt he’s meant to be Fatty but why couldn’t he be more heavy set? I never saw Fatty as a Billy Bunter but strictly as one who is more solidly built so couldn’t he have been slightly filled out around the middle perhaps? He’s due for a change of clothes and his hair could look more like that of Larry’s and why couldn’t there be a little Scottie dog looking adorably up at him. I wonder whether he’s reverted to his original name in the book because it would seem odd if he was still called Fatty when the picture is taken into account.

The person next to him could also be Fatty. The figure is wearing boy’s clothes and has long hair just like “Fatty” although the smiley face somehow looks a little girlish but the boy in green could also me mistaken for a female so there must be an indefinable ‘something’ that conveys the information. As soon as I laid eyes on the person holding the dog I knew she was a girl (I was joking about the misinterpretation) but what was it that told me she was female? It would be an interesting exercise to concentrate on the two children and try to determine exactly what it is that gives us the clues. Could it be the slightest differences in the overall figures or perhaps the parting in the hair of the one on the right? It may be something about the face or maybe her proportions are ever so “slighter” than a male of the same size. She’s Daisy of course and if Bets wants to wear slacks or something, why not put Daisy in a frock or a skirt? She also towering over her older brother so her height needs to be reduced.

The boy at the end must be Pip and I think he’d make a good Pip if movies were made of the series. He conveys the impression of being pretty capable and ready for anything. Looking at him closely, his size looks acceptable and he seems to have the right kind of face although I’ve always visualized Pip with darker hair. Yes, he can go ahead and disrobe because there are some shorts and a shirt (with buttons) waiting for him in the wardrobe department.

I’d like to see a photographic example of the “real” Find-Outers and if they were shown in older style clothing and with appropriate hairstyles I think ‘Instant History’ would somehow walk out of the page and the feeling might be -

“At last. They live again!”

Would today’s children find such a portrayal unacceptable? I feel that the combination of rich ‘quaintness’ and the fact that it contained an intangible ‘difference’ could make it appealing. I’m sure a photographic example of Oliver Cromwell would not have him wearing a T-shirt and jeans and in the recent film that features Enid Blyton, is she dressed as a contemporary female with a Britney hairdo, or is she more appropriately attired? Taking that in mind, I suppose the presentation of the reprints to each generation is that of contemporary literature and the children who buy the books won’t be all that interested in the history of the various printings. A few will of course and then they’ll join the Enid Blyton Society and start complaining with the best of them.

A point in the publishers’ favour is that because Enid Blyton’s books are of such appeal they can be reprinted again and again and, unlike the writings of many other famous authors, they will find acceptance with any generation no matter how much the characters change in appearance. Those sticklers for the authentic Blyton can always read the older books and perhaps, in the future when the copyright expires, the original writings can go online to be preserved forever with all the anomalies they contain because, eventually, the books will disintegrate.

All due deference to the copyright owners for their interest and the action they have taken after their attention was drawn to a book-summary by some of the more eagle-eyed Society members. Praise is also due for their indulgence towards the Society when it comes to discussions and the odd use of the characters for which Enid Blyton became so well known and loved.