Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark: Gammell vs. Helquist Mark Pellegrini December 18, 2011 Literature, PelleCreepy First published in 1981, Alvin Schwartz’s Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark series has since become a necessary staple of every elementary schooler’s intellectual development. Namely, it’s how they learn that books can make you shit your pants. Not to detract from the late author Alvin Schwartz’s contributions to the three-book series; he had a knack for culling the most unsettling examples of folk lore and urban legendry from the collective unconscious and distilling them into a simplified narrative that appealed to the reading level of children whilst not losing an ounce of their spine-tingling effectiveness and grim brutality… but it isn’t the text that folks remember giving them nightmares until they turned thirty. It was the chilling, phantasmic artwork by Stephen Gammell. And to celebrate the 30th Anniversary of the “Scary Stories” book series, publisher Harper Collins decided to eliminate all traces of Gammell’s presence, replacing the original illustrations with new ones by celebrated artist Brett Helquist. Yeah, Happy Anniversary, indeed. “Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark”, “More Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark” and “Scary Stories 3: More Tales to Chill Your Bones” have been three of the most challenged pieces of children’s literature for their thirty years in publication due to the ghastly content of the tales collected and, more-so than that, the gruesome illustrations that have caused many a child to begin crying on the spot. Gammell’s skill at reaching into the darkest depths of his imagination and returning with vivid nightmares which he then captures in all their macabre detail through his paintings is, simply put, unmatched. Harper Collins has shown impressive resolve over the last three decades in standing their ground amidst all the bannings and controversy over the immensely popular book series; so why they finally waited until the 30th Anniversary to relent and remove the most objectionable quality of the books is beyond me. In a way, it’s a matter of principle; they stood firm for so long, why finally fold after thirty years? But it’s also that, after so many, many years and being fondly remembered by so many generations of terrified children, “Scary Stories” has come to be defined by the art of Stephen Gammell; remove his contributions while leaving the text untouched and, well, it just isn’t “Scary Stories” anymore. That’s not to say Brett Helquist isn’t a skilled artist of the creepy and the obscene. Helquist is perhaps best known for illustrating the books and the merchandise for the “Series of Unfortunate Events” children’s novels. He is extremely talented and respected… but he isn’t Stephen Gammell. His contributions to “Scary Stories” are admirable, and while they’d be superb when attached to any other collection of ghost stories for children, they have thirty years of an established visual presence to stack up against and there’s just no overcoming that. So here are a few comparisons between Gammell’s original illustrations and Helquist’s substitutions. The Title Page Gammell: Click to enlarge Helquist: Click to enlarge Right off the bat, when you open up Helquist’s edition, you can tell that you’re in for a far less elaborate experience. This is just the *title page*; you haven’t even gotten to the content of the collection yet… And already Gammell’s version is firing on all cylinders with a dark and surreal backdrop. An old rural house floating in some weird dimension, an unoccupied rocking chair, the silhouette of a man who has hung himself… You haven’t even gotten through the title of the book and already you’re feeling wary. It’s like one of those sign posts outside a dark forest reading “Danger: Do Not Enter”. Frightening, yet alluring you to proceed with apprehension. Meanwhile, Helquist drew a bird and a tombstone. Very creative. There’s also the dedication page, “To Dinah”; Gammell draws a rusty, cobwebbed wheelchair while Helquist draws nothing. Before even getting to the stories themselves, Helquist’s editions are already a blander, less unsettling experience. The Walk Gammell: Helquist: This comparison illustrates one of the major differences between Gammell’s approach and Helquist’s. Gammell is more about conveying the notion of dread rather than capturing the minute details of the scene and the setting. Here in “The Walk”, there’s a fog-shrouded forest and two dark figures becoming separated in the mist; or perhaps they’re approaching you? You don’t know WHAT they are and, in a way, you can just look at this drawing without reading the accompanying story and come up with your own tale. It’s food for the eeriest part of your imagination. Helquist, meanwhile, goes for interpreting the text explicitly. He captures the scenes as they’re described and what liberties he takes tend to revolve around setting the illustrations in a distinct period. This robs the story of its timeless quality; which Schwartz’s vague prose made certain to create. It’s not so scary when it’s happening to a pair of guys from the Victorian era; the reader is safely separated from the danger by a century or more and thus they become less engaged. But black shadows in the woods after dark? That could happen to anyone at any time and that’s what makes it so much more effective. The Haunted House Gammell: Helquist: There she is, boys: The face that shat a thousand pants. Gammell’s illustration for “The Haunted House” is without a doubt the most iconic image in the entire “Scary Stories” series; even becoming the cover of the Treasury edition that collects all three books in a single hardcover volume. No mystery as to why it’s so famous among people who grew up with the books: it is extremely effective. As with “The Walk”, Gammell’s version succeeds in that it places the reader in the story. The ghost is looking at YOU. YOU are trapped in that creaky old house, staring down the empty, rotted eye sockets of some girl who was strangled by her lover. Many of Gammell’s illustrations take this approach, putting the “shot” of the piece in the POV of the reader. Rarely are multiple parties visible at the same time. Gammell places you in the story and that’s what makes nine year-olds want to drop the book and swear to never open it again. Gammell removes the neutrality of third party observations and puts YOU in danger. Helquist, meanwhile, chooses to render the scene as depicted in the book. The ghost doesn’t notice you because you aren’t there. It’s just a picture in a book and the only one in danger is the priest. For what it’s attempting to do (illustrate the scene as described), it’s actually a rather nice piece and I suppose that’s something that’s getting away from me here as I work myself up; all of Helquist’s illustrations are excellent pieces of art. They’re very dynamic, and though they don’t match how I always imagined the story in my head over the past 20 or so years (and how could they?), they’re suitable depictions. But they just aren’t scary. The neutrality of the audience makes them less engaging. Another good example is the illustrations for “The Thing”. Gammell once again opts for a frontal shot of the monster, staring directly at the reader, while Helquist takes the angle to behind the monster’s back as he menaces two children. The reader is in a perfectly “safe” position and the entire experience just loses an element of excitement. Oh, Susannah! Gammell: Helquist: I’m a bit on the fence about this one. Gammell’s illustration is incredible; this utterly bizarre, incomprehensible universe of nightmares and you just can’t tell what the HELL is going on… but it has absolutely *nothing* to do with the story it is attached to. It’s just awesome. Helquist’s earns points for actually relating to the story (about a girl being woken in the middle of the night by her roommate’s whistling, only to find her roommate beheaded in the morning along with the realization that the whistling belonged to the killer)… but for being scary or unnerving? Not so much. The Red Spot Gammell: Helquist: Gammell’s version: “GAAAAAHHHH! GET EM OFF GET EM OFF GET EM OFF!!!” Helquist’s version: “Meh.” Harold Gammell: Helquist: Now here, I feel, it is entirely fair to compare the two versions against one another as it is a case where both Gammell and Helquist take the same approach to the material: “Scary-looking scarecrow staring at the reader”. However, I don’t think there’s any doubt which incarnation of Harold is the more frightening. Gammell’s version could almost be a madman disguised as a scarecrow, but you’ll be damned if you’re going to get close enough to check. Meanwhile, Helquist’s is definitely a dude made out of straw, but in a way, he almost looks “cute” which takes away from the horror. The fact that he looks so wispy and, yes, made of straw also makes him less threatening. Meanwhile, the hulking monstrosity of Gammell’s Harold leaves no doubt that he could kill you and tan your skin on the roof of the farmhouse. In Closing These are just six examples among scores and scores of them. Everything about the production of the 30th Anniversary edition of “Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark” is lacking in comparison to the originals. The illustrations are smaller and only accompany the stories-themselves; small graphics that could be confused for generic clip art accompany glossaries, dedication and title pages. Helquist’s drawings are expertly and professionally rendered for what they are, but they don’t approach the lavishness of Gammell’s sinister paintings. While this would be a fantastic production of just about any other book of ghost stories, when compared to its predecessor, it’s simply a cheap and uninspired product. The necessity of this edition completely eludes me. Why celebrate the 30th Anniversary of the book by changing its most notable feature? The Gammell editions remain in print, so it isn’t “replacing” them, either; the Helquist edition is simply here to coexist with the originals for reasons I cannot fathom. I suppose it may have been done as a compromise to all the school boards and PTAs that have been picketing Harper Collins’ offices for three decades. Gammell’s original editions aren’t going away, but now a “less intense” version of the book has been published to appease outraged Helen Lovejoys the country over. Not a notion I can get behind, I must confess. No child should ever have to grow up without Stephen Gammell’s artwork keeping them up at night. I don’t want to imagine a world like that. It’s just too… frightening. Support Our Cause They changed the art in Scary Stories. Now it’s time to fight back. We have a right to scare the shit out of our children and warp their fragile little minds anyway we please — the right way! Support our cause. Click here or on the t-shirt above to order. UPDATE (1/3/12): As it turns out, the original Stephen Gammell editions HAVE been taken out of print by the publisher! At least at the time of this update, anyway. Prices on new and used copies are already inflating on sites like Amazon.com in response to the altered art, too (a new copy of the Treasury edition from a 3rd party seller is going for $70 bucks at the cheapest). Bobby This story is badly written. Called Out Nice try Brett Helquist. Cheer up, you’re still a good artist. Bobby The second paragraph is one sentence. http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-Pellegrini/500847776 Mark Pellegrini That is indeed a run-on sentence. My bad! But I do not think that devalues the remainder of my article, nor the information and opinions it conveys. And in the case of said run-on sentence, the flow is broken up by the use of semicolons and ellipsis. So while it is indeed a run-on sentence (shame on me!), it is punctuated to guide the reader along and separate the information accordingly. And while in retrospect I see I have abused the semicolon elsewhere in this article, I feel justified in my observations and comparisons of the two artists and their approach to the same material. Likewise, I feel I have articulated them competently. But sorry about the run-on, Bobby! Janelle McKiernan I had no idea that they had re-done the “Scary Stories” trilogy, and my heart breaks a little. Gammell’s artwork has been seared into my brain for decades. The organic, chilling use of ink has always reminded me of dripping blood and the macabre, and those books helped shape my imagination. I applaud your effort to fairly compare Helquist’s work, but truly, there is no comparison. TheSouthernNerdett NO MEGUSTA! These books made me want to shit my pants and I loved them just as creepy and scary as ever. I’ll never forget the spiders….Ugh…many a nightmare. There is NO comparison and I wonder if enough angry parents or something got upset. Seriously? Whats wrong with a scary book for kids that’s been a round for 30 years! For real. You got me fucked up if you think I am buying the new variation. T^T I’d rather hunt down the old ones. Amy You can find them easily on eBay, but just be sure to make sure it’s the right artist! Catethulhu Thanks for the heads up. If anything like this happens, I like to know asap. Just bought the old anthology, before they disappear forever (I suspect they will be snatched quickly when people realize). I loved the originals. I can’t believe they thought this was a good idea. Helquist is a good illustrator and all, but no one can fill Gammell’s shoes. Carmen Sandiego Thank you for the article. I can’t BELIEVE they are doing this! Those versions of the stories and Gammell’s art are inseparable in my mind. I’m glad I still have the originals I purchased in elementary school. Thank Zod my uber-strict mother never censored my reading material. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1127571843 Amanda Pursell I pity future children. Christina F Only if their parents don’t have the original version. http://www.facebook.com/people/Matthew-Carpenter/580547717 Matthew Carpenter I’m so glad I have the treasury. Jon At least the version with the original drawings is still in print. Had they pulled a George Lucas, I’d be upset. http://twitter.com/Pixelfish Lis Mitchell I made a hashtag for Twitter called #DontTouchTheArt in which I mention other works I feel that the art is an integral part of the experience. FellOnEarth I remember when these stories first came out, such great illustrations! My older sister used to read me stories and really laid on the macabre. I think we may still have a copy buried away in some box if she didn’t take it for her own brood. Sad to see the original Gammell art go, they really helped flesh out the horror in the stories. Monica I am so glad I’m not the only one upset by this. Whenever my best friend mentions these books, 18 years after reading them, she STILL shudders about the illustrations–as a lifelong horror film junky! I had been against purchasing the new ones for my library but when I discovered that the set I purchased 2 years ago has already vanished, I bit the bullet. At least the new ones will probably stick around longer… spiderberry 70 dollars ? Really ? I could have bought that book for 12 dollars on sale at Borders before it closed here . Damn . http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-Pellegrini/500847776 Mark Pellegrini Luckily, prices from 3rd party sellers are always fluctuating, so there are a few on Amazon selling it for around $20, I see. And I’m sure places like eBay and used book sites have them in excess for a better price. I also noticed the Treasury hardcovers clearanced at Borders and Barnes & Noble in late ’10, early ’11 and thought nothing of it at the time. In retrospect, I realize they were clearing out their stock to make way for the Helquist editions coming in ’11. Marynraven I know that’s when I picked up my treasury. I’m so glad I did now!!! Pingback: A sad story for Scary Stories To Tell In the Dark | Monster Fan Club not your mom I purchases and read the original versions to my children. They were not “damaged” by them ! The “new” illustrations do not do justice to the stories. If people don’t want their children to read or see these books they do not have to deprive the rest of society from them. They just have to NOT BUY THEM ! We don’t need to be protected. The publisher made a bad call. not your mom Sorry…. I “PURCHASED” …. JL I’m glad you said that. I was thinking the same thing. This is like that damn Mary Whitehouse, who went on a censorship lobbying rampage in the UK. Fucking fascism is what this is. I read these stories and saw the original illustrations when I was six years old. They gave me the creeps, but they didn’t traumatize me. I went back to them over and over to look over all the creepy details. I had been looking into buying the set for nostalgia, and i’m really pissed that this has happened. The screwed up, self-righteous, stuffy parents/”activists” who convinced the publisher to do this should be ashamed of themselves. It’s not right to spoil everyone’s fun for the sake of an oversensitive minority. And that’s exactly what those books are: FUN. They didn’t have to take the originals out of print. Why couldn’t they print both versions? We need a boycott of HarperCollins books or a petition. If the only way to get the originals is to shell out an inflated $70, I just won’t buy them. lawl But in the article, he said the Gammell edition is still being printed, there will just be two different editions. So its not all bad. It’s like a movie with two disks. One side has gore, the other is the same movie but without gore. Although I remember reading the books because I WANTED to get scared. Gammell did a great job with creeping me out. getting scared on purpose is kind of thrilling if done right Farthngdr Mark: A beautifully written analysis of the two versions of this book. The pictures indeed so terrified my daughter that she made me buy the book–she wanted me to share the terror with her. Amazing artwork–sheer genius. http://www.facebook.com/people/Brooke-Hendrickson/593725541 Brooke Hendrickson Stephen Gammell is a master of his craft. The Scary Stories series has be so iconic for the past three decades, that it just doesn’t make sense 1) why the publisher would celebrate that by stripping away the most recognizable feature and 2) why Brett Helquist, as a respected illustrator, would invite the unfavorable comparison upon himself. I work at a bookstore and I remember when the first person came to pay for the new edition at the counter: I was shocked. I was completely dismayed that the publisher had recommissioned the art work and have since had many discussions with people about it. I’m a fan of Mr. Helquist’s work, but it just doesn’t suit this collection. Let’s face it, in retrospect, a lot of the stories were kind of hokey and somewhat clumsily written. What actually made these stories SCARY were the illustrations. I still have the paperback box set that I purchased at my primary school book fair and I’ve often looked to it for inspiration in my own art for how to set the mood and create an atmosphere (I’m also a freelance illustrator).Once this edition eventually sells out its print run, perhaps Harper Collins will bring back Mr. Gammell’s work. How else are we supposed to scare the shit out of unsuspecting children? Blitzedcat whoever changed the art is stupid and i hate them. lily They pussyfied it. Buck Swoosh McLaundryman yeah wth? http://teasingfool.tumblr.com Teasing Fool I am so very glad I held on to my original copies from the Scholastic book fairs of elementary school. It is truly disheartening to think that children will not get to enjoy the original art as my generation has. Pingback: RPPR Episode 69: Critique of Cthulhu | Role Playing Public Radio YOU RIKE BAYOBRADES? THIS IS SOME BULlSHIT Jason Back in my grade school days the Scary Stories books were indeed the most popular thing in the library. I remember in 5th grade (1991-92 school year), it was a competition to be the one who checked them out. You had to be fast or someone else would get it. The stories were creepy as a kid, but while they’ve lost that aspect now that I’m an adult, Stephen Gammell’s illustrations are just as awesome as they’ve always been, and can serve as nightmare fuel for just about anyone. That Harper-Collins would replace such classic and iconic artwork is beyond me, considering they hadn’t caved to pressure from moral guardians for the previous three decades. Any Gen X-ers who liked these books as kids and want them for nostalgia’s sake and/or to share with their own kids should not buy the 30th anniversary versions out of protest if they haven’t bought the older editions. Maybe market pressure will convince H-C to restore the old illustrations. http://www.facebook.com/Casi.Durfee Casi Durfee THIS IS NOT OKAY. Gargus You know, I still think that Stephen Gammell is insane, and probably should have been fired for submitting that art back in the 80s… But honestly? When I heard about an update to the art, I was expecting something more along the lines of “The same, but less likely to be your nightmares for the next ten years”, not this boring art. magz I used to read that stuff FOR THE ART as a kid. If anything I thought it was cool not scary. And when I read I was eight and liked my little ponies. So yeah..part of growing up is being scared. You want something really scary you should go read some original fairy tales. http://twitter.com/tako_chan Jessika This makes me SO angry! They’ve ruined them! Steampunk105 why would they do that the original artists pictures were way more epic no offense to the other artist but its true i think ill go and cry in the corner for a while *childhood ruined * Babys i dont hate the artist i hate whoever changed it. Pingback: [INFP] Thread of Random Thoughts and Ideas Boysnightout99 So they changed the art so future generations will grow up to be cowards. Not knowimg what a good scare is. I mean when your young and ypur exposed to scary or frightening things you get over it and in my case you start to like it. His art was one of a kind. The new artist is very plain and boring in my opinion, it doesnt strike any emotion. Whereas the old art struck emotion immediatly and I was drawn to and couldnt take my eyes off the pictures. Pingback: They're Ruining “Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark” | Viral Roulette | viral video | buzz | entertainment Ashram12 The new artwork is terrible in my opinion. First of all, the new illustrations are too gray and murky: where is the contrast? When you’re doing an illustration in grayscale, you need to show a range of tone going from black to white. Here it just goes from dark gray to light gray, so nothing really pops. Secondly, the style is too cartoony to be scary. Just because cartoon-style illustrations are the “in” thing in children’s publishing, doesn’t mean that style should be used everywhere. Anonymous Thank the ALA http://www.ala.org/advocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged/challengedbydecade/1990_1999 Pingback: This is an OUTRAGE! | grouchymuffin Yournightsurgeon Thanks for ruining my childhood book you censor loving idiots. I read those books as a very young child and they just made me happy, I loved the drawings more than the stories. Thedodus The Gammell illustration for “Oh, Susannah!” actually DOES have to do with the story–I didn’t find this out myself until years and years later. In the original variation of the legend, the girl discovers her roommate beheaded while the killer is still in the room. He’s sitting in a rocking chair, continuing to whistle, with the roommate’s head. Guess what that is floating in the sky in Gammell’s illustration? A little easter egg of You’re not sleeping tonight kids. Ryan I remember and loved these books because of the art even more than the stories! At 8 years old I remember being so scared I couldn’t sleep, so I just kept reading.. It was almost like a rite of passage for my group of friends. I can say the new art does nothing whatsoever to evoke the feel of the book. My assumption will be that once sales tank they’ll change it back. Here’s to hoping. linds The original art was so much more disturbing visually. I’m sad they would change it. This new art, not that it’s bad, just doesn’t scare me as much. It doesn’t draw out my imagination. Yes the new art work is appealing, but that is why I love the original art work. It’s twisted and non-traditional. I couldn’t look away. This new art work is not scary in the least nor will it scare any of today’s youths. They’re far too desensitized. The original illustrations, however, well they would scare anybody. JL It’s comforting to see that so many people are upset about this. I was really ticked off at first, but if enough people were to complain about what an atrocity this is, we could really turn this around. There is no reason those originals should have gone out of print unless they just weren’t selling. And I have a feeling they were. Palliative I think most of us realized during our school years that very few schools reguarly buy new books. Especially books that aren’t textbooks. I bet the version with Gammell’s drawings will be in a majority of the classrooms for years to come. Taksi96 They have ruined it D: It ain’t as scary anymore, Loved the old illustrations Pingback: Scary Stories with Less Scary Art | Eric Hoefler Pingback: My Remote Radio » This Is An Outrage! Pingback: Please don’t mess with the classics « Attentiondeficitdisorderly by Sean T. Collins Pingback: Farewell, old and creepy friend http://www.facebook.com/kateunver Kate Ünver WHY IS THIS HAPPENING http://www.facebook.com/kateunver Kate Ünver WHY IS THIS HAPPENING!? WHAT ABOUT THE NIGHTMARES OF FUTURE GENERATIONS???? http://www.facebook.com/kateunver Kate Ünver I used to have nightmares that Harold was on my garage. this is bullshit! blasphemy! furious! D: Pingback: Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark (but not too scary) | Barbarism Pingback: Scary stories to tell in the dark « lespetitesflaneuses http://www.facebook.com/KingPuddin Jonathan King Puddin Morales What the hell kind of Harry Potter bullshit is this? They need to tone down toning things down… Pingback: Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark, soon to become Meh Stories. | Just Some Broad Hime As a little kid, the stories were bad enough, but those pictures scared me more than the stories! I don’t think I ever finished a book all the way through, and I had all three. I’d be freaked out from reading and turn the page and GAH!!! So maybe this is a good thing for little chickens like me. As a grown up, I can appreciate the original (Gammell’s) art, but I definitely didn’t as a little kid. SubarashiProductions I’d be pretty embarrassed if I were Helquist. He must not be familiar with the book or desperate for the job to turn in work that is so plainly inferior in concept and execution, compared to the original. It’s like the recent editions of fantasy book covers that replace elaborate painting with photos bought online. (Thomas Covenant as an example) Nequam He may have had to draw the art with certain directives from the producers in mind. Notice that the art for “The Red Spot” no longer shows the horrible denouement but instead the moment that will lead up to the denouement (the illustration for “The Bride” from More Scary Stories… does the same thing, showing the woman innocently stepping into the chest instead of what was found later). Pingback: Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark Gets New Art of the Day - TDW Geeks opiate46 Anyone else think that those pictures were added to give the book a “Harry Potter” look? I wonder if they are just trying to cater to the current crop of kids. Either way, thanks for this article. I remember reading these when I was a kid, and the images were easily as creepy as the stories themselves if not more so. It’s a true shame that they changed them. Nissi This is such distressing news. I checked these books out the library dozens of times. My sister got Scary Stories 3 for her birthday (her birthday is two days before halloween). It scared the crap out of her. Gave her nightmares even. And she would read that book over and over again. I think kids need good safe scares like these books provide them. Guess I’m going on a quest to find the first two. Fallenknight73 Hey Harper Collins how about meeting us halfway and bringing back the Gammell artwork versions for the young adult section and the Helquist version for the younger pre-teen readers then everyone has a choice and is happy. Getting rid of “Scary Stories” with Gammell’s artwork is censorship and that is wrong. Gavin Shame on the publishers! These books were so special to me as a child. Children will be very, very boring in years to come. Emily Schonberg This is an abomination to the monstrous beauty that thrilled our little hearts and filled them with fear. Whoever decided to change out the illustrations should be fired on the grounds of “lamest possible decision making for a book, ever” If the illustrations were changed out for possibly being thought too frightening for a young one, then they’re idiots who over censor their children’s environment and teach them to binge on thoughts, words and habits later in life in an unhealthy way. If I was too frightened to pick this book up as a child, I didn’t. But when I found my adventurous streak I was rewarded by the fantastic sensory experience that the pairing of the words and drawings elicit. Shame on them for commercializing something so special. Ricklucey Wow I must of gone to some lame schools as I never knew about these books till I saw this article and I am a huge horror fan myself. I have to say Gammell wins this hands down. Why they change things that worked in the first place is always beyond me. Yet it happens all the time. I still really like the Helquist work, but in the context he is not going to do it. Pingback: TheYayOrNay.com : Publishers Change and Ruin ‘Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark’ Illustrations https://profiles.google.com/102079010287477493920?hl=en&tab=h crow I like Helquist and I like Gammell! You guys need to understand that Gammell’s work may not sell in the 2010s. Right now, America is going through a phrase of excessive censorship. This is a cycle that’s been going on since the dawn of civilization. It’s a fundamental trait of civilization: leadership control versus lack of leadership control. What we need to be thankful for in the 21st century is that the cycle is now so short that we can benefit from the best of both cultures. Pingback: A Nightmare Deferred | Gloomcorps Pingback: Then I peed myself « Be Random, Be Clear Pingback: “Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark” Illustrations to be Changed | Verbicide Magazine Coffeekelsy WHY! WHY! WHYYYYYYY WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!???????????? Pingback: On Children’s Literature and Censorship – A Brief Look at Art, Literary Theory & Scary Stories | Indecent and Immortal Gtchrisb01 OK…About 3 weeks ago I was on a dismounted patrol through an Afghan village that hates the US. I saw a big white dog that barked at me and literally big bad combat medic here started singing “Lynchee kinchee collie mollie dingo dingo”. I got home a week ago, and I’m seriously more distraught at the recently learned fact that THEY CHANGED THE G*D*&ANMED ART WORK????!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!! than I am at the mortar rounds I took later that same night. I fear for YOU fellow citizens….SMH. Thankfully for you I’m on YOUR side. http://twitter.com/WritersWithCats Paul and Paula Soooo…just another way we’re coddling and sheltering and protecting prepubescents from things that go bump on the night. You know, as a human race, we SUCK at proper parenting across the freaking boards. http://twitter.com/AlexStormwing Alexandra Stormwing This is a true shame. I remember reading these books when I was younger, and though I don’t remember a thing about the stories I DO remember the pictures. Those imaginative, surreal, utterly terrifying pictures that haunted me for days. Changing the art in these books is a crime. The art was the best part! http://www.facebook.com/people/Bobbie-Jean-Pentecost/100000391760333 Bobbie Jean Pentecost Hear that? That is the sound of a hundred thousand childhood memories getting buttraped inside out. The whole !@#$%^&*ING POINT of the book was those illustrations! WTFH!? schumannhertz this entire article is hilarious – I also totally agree with you about the fact that the Gammell drawings are just so much more unsettling and freaky than the new version – I mean, for God’s sake, when I was a kid and checked these books out from the library, I kept each one separate from each other, sandwiched between other, ditzier and happier books because I thought if they were stacked together, the monsters would gain strength and come alive! COME ON NOW! I doubt the Helquist drawings, nice though they are, would’ve made 9 year-old me resort to such drastic actions. http://twitter.com/sandftw Della Martinez well it’s a good thing i have the original! :D not that Helquist is a horrible illustrator, but he’s just not good for scary stories. Andrethefaivre these new illustrations are bad and you should feel bad! Josephine They’ve been Harry-Potter-ized, right down to the font. yukinolove seriously WTF! Why would the do that, the artwork was part of the experience of reading those books. Shame on them. Amandamacabre Wow..sure glad I still have my originals stored away safely for my own next generation. This is an absolute outrage. Are we really living in a society that can see soft core porn on the cover of a victoria’s secret billboard but not cultured by the darker sides of life? This is more horrifying than the new art itself. Goodweezy It looks like a total Harry Potterification of the artwork. I don’t know the timing of the release of this edition (I didn’t even read the article, that’s how lazy I am), so I can’t make any accusations — but damn — my first thought was: “Is this the guy that did Harry Potter? Does he get to pick the fuckin font too?!” Ssantwan Gammell is ahead of the generation and there is no reason why this replacement is called for. Do publishers really think “dumbing down” the artwork in the book to more overused art styles that I could have drawn in the 5th grade is going to sell more to a younger crowd? The stories and the art go hand in hand are by far illustrations I will remember till I am old. Whoever thought this was a good idea picked the wrong industry to work in. Jjezeski Thank god I have 2 of the 3 original Scary Stories books (1 & 2, missing 3 ). But yeah…why did they change the artwork? Did a bunch of rabid soccer moms threaten the publishers with death or something? Pingback: [WTF] HarperCollins Celebrates 30 Years Of ‘Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark’ By Destroying The Art?! | Bloody Disgusting Mack King fucking heresy! BLASPHEMY!! Pingback: Remember this? - Page 33 - Home Brew Forums Xdf This sucks. Totally!!!!! http://twitter.com/SmegmaKing Michael Joseph Gave my little bro the old editions as a random gift he called them fake and gay then he called the police but they arrived to late to save him MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Hey A Boat This is completely unconscionable. Tantamount to replacing the illustrations in a Dr. Seuss book with something else to better suit “modern audiences.” Ridiculous. Scrodwaffle You know that the parents who have challenged this book let their kids watch slasher flicks when they are in the third and fourth grade, right? Shellshock32 another idiot messing up my child hood memories, god just stop already J. The second I heard there was going to be a change in artists I knew the publisher was going to pull the original from print so I snatched them up for my daughter to enjoy. Glad I did. Pingback: Art for Arts Sake « Hengist the Nord's Blog Lgreenlee These were my favorite books growing up. I now have a 6 year old son. We went to his school’s book fair today and saw that they had the set for sale. I thought “Oh how I would love for my son to have these!” The cover was different but I hadn’t thought that the artwork inside was changed so I bought the set. I had told him there were pictures inside to look at. We opened the set up when we got home and he said “mommy, where are the pictures??” I found some and they were NOT the same pictures that I had grown up to… WTH!!! I am so mad that they changed the books. I will be looking on ebay, amazon, or barnes and noble to find the original books!! Howtogrowgods Maybe it’s just a publicity stunt aimed at adults who haven’t thought about these books in years and now have disposable incomes to blow on childhood nostalgia. Buy the older version before it’s gone now, and then again when they release it in 10 years. Telekinopticfire I can’t go on living. Pingback: Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark - Religious Education Forum http://www.facebook.com/people/Matthew-Carpenter/580547717 Matthew Carpenter We are wussy-fying the next generation. Roach Sheltered children make for bad adults. So sad there are people out there who would try and dumb down and “protect” theyre precious offspring this way. Good thing ive got my copy! Ill make sure my kids grow up with some guts ;] maybe theyll take it to show & tell! http://twitter.com/Mahramus Anthony Mahramus Stephen Gammell Strikes Back http://www.thebanisterslide.com/2012/06/stephen-gammell-strikes-back-2/ Canine Diamond The illustrations for “Oh, Susannah” and “The Haunted House” specificall did serious damage to my eight-year-old mind . . . and for that I thank them. Seriously. The first two books (I’m old; the third one wasn’t out yet) are pretty much singlehandedly responsible for sending me down the path to a list of death-related interests that came to include folklore, cemeteries, paranormal research (and I’m a skeptic but I still find it fascinating), true crime, forensic science, and experiments in how much black you can wear in middle school before your English teacher gets nervous and sends you to the principal’s office. Part of my childhood has died. Kelsey I’m actually really upset by this. I only have two of the original books from when I bought them at a book fair in 2nd grade. I can’t wait to read them to my children to show them what 1) real art looks like and 2) that being scared is nothing to be scared of. cass I love the “Series of Unfortunate Events” books but MAN, they’re effing with my childhood here. LEAVE IT BE. Pingback: Funeral Parade Pingback: Cry Baby Lane: The Film Nickelodeon Didn't Want You to Know About Lola Q. I have to say I enjoyed your crical analysis of the 2 versions almost as much as I enjoyed the original (and the creepy artwork of course). Very well done…you make an excellent argument(as if the artwork itself isn’t enough to convince anyone who appreciates the macabre). Oh and by the way, I laughed so hard that I literally couldn’t breath at the line “There is she boys; the face that shat a thousand pants”! I have to admit , I was included in that thousands! http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504948705 Jacob William Hoss I agree 1000% with your analysis. When a child is confronted with something scary, there’s an assortment of defense mechanisms they want to reach for. Familiar elements add comfort, like pop culture references and product placements thrown into modern horror movies. Because the idea of a ghost or monster seems silly with a top 40 single playing in the background, or drinking Coca-cola, or tripping over your Star Wars Lego set. These are things you know from your everyday life, and it makes the threat seem almost comically incongruous. Likewise, period details accomplish this by placing the threat comfortably outside one’s experience. Dashing Victorian gentlemen with monocles and capes have confronted the supernatural in so many films, books, and stories that it seems no more unsettling than a bushranger wrestling a croc, a caveman hunting a mammoth, or a Zulu warrior spearing a lion. With Gammell’s illustrations, you have nothing on which to steady yourself psychologically. It’s like a rotting, skeletal finger reaching through your ear and directly pressing the “fear” button in your brain. Time and place, as well as the laws of physics, were of no comfort to you. Rotting shacks floated in an aether or threatening mists, menacing, not quite human shadows could appear anywhere if you looked long enough, unsettling roots, mold, and veins sprouted from every surface, and amorphous blobs wrapped in human flesh with patches of hair and teeth floated throughout. The Oh Susannah! illustration was one of my favorites, because though it didn’t depict the story’s events it seemed to convey the sense of improbable horror and helplessness the protagonist felt. Your reaction to it is like looking at crime scene photos from Jeffrey Dahmer or Ed Gein, in that you’re not looking at dismembered bodies, blood, and guts so much as you’re staring directly into the depths of human depravity. Pingback: On Childhood Horror- Scary Stories to Read in the Dark, Part 1 « arttowords Pingback: Scary Stories with Less Scary Art | Crafting the Dark Fantastic http://www.facebook.com/stephen.t.alders Stephen Tyler Alders I had to wait for months to check these books out at my school’s library. Soooo worth the wait. One of my friends got me the set for my 8th birthday, and the haunted house picture made me cry. Totally worth it though. I will always love the originals. They have a special place in my heart. Pack Man The pussification of America continues. We don’t want our children to be frightened by Halloween books, do we… boo I think the most telling comparison here is in the artwork for “The Red Dot.” Where Gammell creates an image that is effectively unsettling, disturbing, and all around unpleasant to behold, Helquist drew a picture of a pretty girl with a spider on her face. How terrifying. Buck Swoosh McLaundryman I never knew these books had such a following. I devoured them in a day when I was maybe 7 and after that I reread them over and over for the effect of the art. That art was one of a kind. It resonated in your mind with it’s madness, echoing in your psyche and giving you nightmares if you could even fall asleep. That was fun, though. I wasn’t scarred I was enlightened if anything, and the idea that future generations of young’uns won’t have the enjoyment of pooping their pants is really depressing. I loved those books and their sadistically scary art. Silla This has got to be the most stupidest thing I have ever heard. It’s was definitely the pictures that made the book. Without it, this is nothing but any other book if scary stories. Valyriefaerie I DIDN’T BELIEVE THEY RUINS IT!!!! Shane blake I actually have a piece of gammells art Tattooed on my arm. Its the one from “you may be the next…” for them to change it is just appalling on my childhood. Angry Might as well change the title from Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, to Normal Stories to Tell in a Well Lit Room Destiny They’ve ruined the books that made my childhood.Fortunately,I have an old copy.Yeah.Be jealous. Janay I think for the sake of a CHILDREN’S book, it was a good move. Those pictures frightened me far too much as a kid. They set me up to be afraid of the dark and scary movies. Save Gammell for adult horror. The new images are much more appropriate and the text itself still makes it scary. Pingback: Splatterhouse 5 – A Nightmare Deferred hackjack agh I just found out about this while I was trying to purchase a copy of these books and was wondering why some of them were so expensive. I am so disappointed that they changed the illustrations!!!!! Vi I’m sorry, but I’m gonna have to say I like Helquist’s better. Maybe I’m odd, but I was (and still am) terrified by the original art. Couldn’t sleep right for days after reading them, I only read each book once because I was too afraid to open them again. The only thing I disliked about them was the art, so I’d like to enjoy rereading the storys without the nightmares, thank you. Linda Smith So bloody happy I bought all of these with my hard-earned allowance (I saved all year for the Scholastic Book Fairs!) when I was just a kid… The art was why I bought them in the first place. It was ethereal and lovely and just my speed, even as a six-year-old. I’m glad I still have them, I wouldn’t let my children read them without the original art if I could help it! Pingback: Nostag-O-Rama: The Scary Stories Series | The Geektastics Pingback: » Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark: Gammell vs. Helquist Nullary Sources Roro I know I’m completely late commenting on this article, but I have to say how disappointed I am! I remember how much I used to love to read these books over and over. Every time I went to the library I would at least get one of the three books. So, now it’s 10 years later and today I decided to take my 10 year old cousin (who is my age when I loved the books) to the bookstore to see if she liked them. I wanted to read her a few stories. To my horror, I saw that all the drawings are changed and even worse, the book held no fear for me any longer. It was the drawings all along that kept me up at night. They’re just not right any more. . . This article was spot on. The new illustrations are NICE. But they’re just nice. Not nightmare inducing creations which is where all the fun is at. Rina That’s really stupid. Helquist did a great job on Series of Unfortunate Events… I’m just glad I have the originals. Moonfang So fucking glad i have the originals. It’s true that they were the scariest things to me when i was young and sometimes it kept me up at night, but i loved them anyway. They were what got me into reading, writing, and art and they will always be my number one books. Pingback: A look back at Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark | Korsgaard's Commentary DarklingMagick Oh, God! it looks like Amazon doesn’t carry the original illustrations anymore! This isn’t right! MSCITIZEN They don’t even come CLOSE! I’m so offended! Lame-o Michael Here’s the really amazing thing about Gammell: You keep referring to his work as “paintings”, but they’re not paintings. They’re rendered in charcoal. If you’ve never worked in charcoal, you should know that it is a uniquely punishing and unforgiving medium, one that requires the utmost skill and patience to master. That he should exhibit such a bizarre and inspired perspective through just such a medium only further proves his genius. Pingback: There’s Going to Be a ‘Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark’ Movie | WebProNews Kat They’ve ruined it! I’m a seventh grader who has memorized numerous stories and doodle likenesses of the art on my schoolwork (my teachers think I’m demented!) and I can’t find the original book. This is coming from a child and her 10 year old and 6 year old brothers and sisters: give us our gammell back!