![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
aged-crone.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
queensthiefI've just read an online article at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16721095/site/newsweek/
all about how for the 75th anniversary of the Little House books they're releasing new versions illustrated with photographs of models as the characters, and I am feeling absolutely murderous.
A quote:
""Girls might feel the Garth Williams art is too old-fashioned," says Tara Weikum, executive editor for the "Little House" series. "We wanted to convey the fact that these are action-packed. There were dust storms and locusts. And they had to build a cabin from scratch." (The new tag line: "Little House, Big Adventure.")"
If the illustrations are too old-fashioned, then the stories are. But neither is true. The illustrations *MATCH* the stories. Is Tara Weikum genuinely so stupid that she thinks that only photographs will make the books look action-packed? I was angry enough some years ago when they changed the typeface of the Little House books to look harsher and less attractive. This makes me wanna hurl. Harper has been making money hand over fist for three quarters of a century with these books. They should be able to afford not to cater to the lowest possible taste that they can find.
Also in the article they mention releasing copies of Bridge to Terabithia with pictures from the upcoming movie. Bridge isn't my favorite book, but I saw the preview for the movie earlier this year and couldn't believe my eyes. It deserves better than the high-tech, overwrought, action-adventure treatment that the previews showed.
"Allison Edheimer, 9, wants the photo version of the "Little House" series. "I'd rather read something where I can picture the person," she says. Rachael Ross, 10, agrees: "I like seeing real people better than drawings," she says. "Drawings look sort of fake."" Little Allison's parents and teachers should maybe work on developing her imagination. If she can't picture the Little House characters from the stories and the illustrations, she's been watching way too much TV. and if little Rachel thinks that posed photographs with models are somehow more authentic than drawings, intelligence would appear to be an issue.
So, ladies, apparently the only way to attract readers to the Thief books is to slap a photograph on the cover. Probably of some vapid Hollywood-style pretty-boy.
Leslie, wistfully pondering granching
all about how for the 75th anniversary of the Little House books they're releasing new versions illustrated with photographs of models as the characters, and I am feeling absolutely murderous.
A quote:
""Girls might feel the Garth Williams art is too old-fashioned," says Tara Weikum, executive editor for the "Little House" series. "We wanted to convey the fact that these are action-packed. There were dust storms and locusts. And they had to build a cabin from scratch." (The new tag line: "Little House, Big Adventure.")"
If the illustrations are too old-fashioned, then the stories are. But neither is true. The illustrations *MATCH* the stories. Is Tara Weikum genuinely so stupid that she thinks that only photographs will make the books look action-packed? I was angry enough some years ago when they changed the typeface of the Little House books to look harsher and less attractive. This makes me wanna hurl. Harper has been making money hand over fist for three quarters of a century with these books. They should be able to afford not to cater to the lowest possible taste that they can find.
Also in the article they mention releasing copies of Bridge to Terabithia with pictures from the upcoming movie. Bridge isn't my favorite book, but I saw the preview for the movie earlier this year and couldn't believe my eyes. It deserves better than the high-tech, overwrought, action-adventure treatment that the previews showed.
"Allison Edheimer, 9, wants the photo version of the "Little House" series. "I'd rather read something where I can picture the person," she says. Rachael Ross, 10, agrees: "I like seeing real people better than drawings," she says. "Drawings look sort of fake."" Little Allison's parents and teachers should maybe work on developing her imagination. If she can't picture the Little House characters from the stories and the illustrations, she's been watching way too much TV. and if little Rachel thinks that posed photographs with models are somehow more authentic than drawings, intelligence would appear to be an issue.
So, ladies, apparently the only way to attract readers to the Thief books is to slap a photograph on the cover. Probably of some vapid Hollywood-style pretty-boy.
Leslie, wistfully pondering granching
no subject
Date: 1/22/07 10:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1/23/07 02:48 am (UTC)I just went to the link and read it and (Leslie hyperventilates) - THEY'RE REDOING THE ILLUSTRATONS OF RAMONA THE PEST????? (I assume that's the Ramona they mean. It was bad enough when that delightfuly imp that Louis Darling drew was replaced on the jacket by Alan Tiegreen's far-inferior version, but... but... but...
I need my smelling salts.
no subject
Date: 1/23/07 03:06 am (UTC)those were actually more my little sister's books than mine, but it still hurts.
whenever I see people with corkscrew curls I really, really want to pull them and watch them bounce.
*hands over smelling salts*
no subject
Date: 1/23/07 05:22 am (UTC)__
LOL, Me Too!!!
no subject
Date: 1/23/07 06:15 pm (UTC)People were constantly "boing-ing" them - it was pretty fun, and fortunately she didn't mind.
no subject
Date: 1/23/07 03:23 am (UTC)