iâm thinking about how much the style of illustrations can define any book, for children everywhere⌠and our perceptions of the mood of a âstyleâ are so culturally ingrained; taught to us subtly from everything. for example:
brett helquistâs illustrations for a series of unfortunate events by lemony snicket looked like this:
they were evocative in a grim sort of way. they were really good, of course, but there was an undeniable twinge of gloom, of sorrow to them, which meant that as illustrations they added so much to the experience of reading the books, and we donât give it enough credit for that!
whereas take tove janssonâs moomin booksâ illustrations, by herselfâ so warm and nostalgic:
her work was stylistically memorable and recognisable. even with the monochromatic illustrations, youâd never confuse her art with brett helquistâs art. the moomin books and the a series of unfortunate events books could never have been successful if they had switched to each otherâs art styles.
and another famous childrenâs book illustrator that comes to mindâ quentin blake, who illustrated roald dahlâs books, such as matilda and charlie and the chocolate factory. youâd be hard pressed to get yourself a version of the texts without his illustrations, which look like this:
his illustrations captured the whimsicality, the fun, the slight enticingly rude sort of edge to roald dahlâs writing so well for childrenâin a way that meant that theyâd get the feeling of the book from the images, too.
honestly, i canât help thinking that 1. illustrations often make or break childrenâs literature.; 2. they definitely contribute to the collective memory and love of a text; and 3. illustrators are underappreciated.
theartofmadeline
kianamaiart
annaxmalina
pixelskylines
jacobvanloon
