So with the new Beatrix Potter story that will come out in September (a publisher got the rights to an unfinished manuscript, for those who don't want to follow the link to the article), I've been thinking more about authors and illustrators.


Some books which were written and illustrated by the same person seem like an entirely different book when the illustrations are replaced by another artist's work, or when the illustrations are used for other stories.

The Beatrix Potter story, for instance, is going to now be illustrated by Quentin Blake (think the Roald Dahl books), and I'm not sure I will be able to think of it at all as a "Beatrix Potter" story anymore. The illustrations seemed so integral to the story, and their styles are completely different.


Or, since I grew up reading A.A.Milne, seeing the Disney version of Winnie The Pooh was a complete shock to me, and I still can't really picture that cartoony imaging of my beloved Bear as the "real thing".


Or conversely, the illustrator Frederick Richardson -once you've seen his work paired with a beloved story, when it crops up in another setting altogether (like on a greeting card, or a "motivational" poster) is sometimes jarring.

Do you think this is because certain works were created to go together, or simply because something was familiar in a certain setting and any change is therefor highlighted?


Do you follow any illustrators, buying their works without regard to the author they worked with last?

I'm usually more interested in the authors but there are times that I really enjoy the illustrators. If I like their style I'll seek out more of their stuff but if I don't like the story I'm probably not going to buy it no matter how good the art is.

I know what you mean! I was kind of bummed that Mary GrandPré wasn't the illustrator for the new Harry Potters I bought, because the illustrations were such a part of the book for me.

I don't really follow illustrators though. That's a good idea though!

I love illustrators, but I agree the story is generally more important to me than the pictures. If it's something where the illustrations are an integral part of the story, like comics or manga, I think an illustrator can sink or save a so-so story. And of course, there is nothing better than when your favorite writers and illustrators are together on a visual project like that.

Akili Li wrote:because certain works were created to go together, or simply because something was familiar in a certain setting and any change is therefor highlighted?

I think it's the latter. I think even when authors themselves don't believe certain illustrations match their books, readers will still feel as if the two were made for each other.

I'm really sensitive to book art. It's always jarring for me when a book is republished with a new cover. :')

brighnasa wrote:If it's something where the illustrations are an integral part of the story, like comics or manga, I think an illustrator can sink or save a so-so story.

I think even when the illustrations aren't integral to the story, good illustrations can redeem a so-so story. Sometimes they provide the additional character that a story is lacking. v_v

Update on this; finally got my hands on a copy of the Beatrix-Potter-story-with-Quentin-Blake-pictures.

Um.

Nope, did not work for me at all. >.<

If I favor an illustrator, I'd buy their art books
As for novels, I'm more interested in the authors. I don't pay much attention to the illustrators

Akili Li wrote:Do you think ...certain works were created to go together, or simply because something was familiar in a certain setting and any change is therefor highlighted?

Do you follow any illustrators, buying their works without regard to the author they worked with last?

I think that certain works make a stronger impression on you when you've already developed a connection with them. They feel more true, more right, because the combination's imprinted on you somehow.

For example, the original art in CS Lewis' "Narnia" series will always feel that way to me.

Of course, certain stories, like DM Cornish's "Monster Blood Tattoo" series had art from the author, and I think that lends an additional depth to the tale, especially with both mediums (written and drawn) came from the same source.

So I guess it could be both? Or it depends?


I don't follow many illustrators who aren't manga artists, and even then, the stories they collaborate on are important to me. "Hikaru no Go" has made an impression on me in the way that "Death Note" has never quite reached, even though it was drawn by the same artist, and Obata's art has become even more refined in the latter series.