Charlie and the Chocolate Factory 50th anniversary cover

IMG_1810.JPG

Soooo this is the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory book cover. I hate it. I absolutely hate it! It’s just…creepy! And makes me think of dolls! And….*shudders* What on earth made them think this was a suitable book cover?! I’d rather have an illustration by Sir Quentin Blake as the cover any day! Those are the drawings I know and love from my childhood and will always associate with Roald Dahl’s books.

Joanne Harris, author of Chocolat, was said to have tweeted:

“Seriously, Penguin Books. Why not just get Rolf Harris to design the next one? I’m not sure why adults need a different cover anyway, but who was it who decided that ‘adult’ meant ‘inappropriately sexualised’?”

She hit the nail on the head there. A very good point made. And I’ve never understood why there are alternative covers for adults, either.

Advertisements

Posted on August 11, 2014, in Books and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

  1. I honestly think Penguin weren’t content with this being a children’s novel, and this is their thinly veiled attempt at tarting it up. The girl isn’t even Veruca or Violet, so I have *no* idea what this cover is supposed to represent. They didn’t either, as was revealed in their article on the BBC news website. If they can’t explain, very simply, what their angle was – then you can bet they actually didn’t have one. They thought their audience would do all the thinking.

    Well, we did. We hate it.

    /sigh.

    Like

    • No matter how they dress it up, though, the book is still a children’s book. I can’t believe they didn’t have a reason behind choosing the cover! So, what, they thought: “Hey, this is pretty, and not weird or creepy in the *slightest*, let’s have this as the cover”?

      *shakes head*

      Like

      • It’s an insult to what is one of the most loved children’s books of all time – hence why they made it a classic. Totally undermines the magic of the illustrations we know and love. Also, what’s creepier – I think I read that the “little girl” is actually doll. The picture is taken from some show in France.
        Which makes even LESS SENSE! Gah. How creepy.

        Like

      • It really is an insult. I thought that because it was the 50th anniversary that maybe they’d republish the original cover, but nope! Well, that makes sense as to why I thought she *was* a doll then lol! From some show in France? Okaaaay, yeah, coz it would make sense to do that lol.

        Like

  2. I totally don’t get the cover.. I meant if I were a kid ( which I am at heart) then I will definitely be put off by this cover like, really *sigh*

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: