The Enid Blyton Society

I'll huff and puff a bit about modernisation etc but if I can get it for a good price after a little while I'm sure I will add it to my collection!

I agree with Pete. Will buy the book when I can get it very cheap i.e. from ebay.

pete9012S wrote:I'll huff and puff a bit about modernisation etc but if I can get it for a good price after a little while I'm sure I will add it to my collection!

sixret wrote:I agree with Pete. Will buy the book when I can get it very cheap i.e. from ebay.

Which isn't really saying much about how you value the book!!

In the end, I don't mind about 'modernisation' - hey - I loved the 1970's Famous Fives annuals, I absolutely adore Moonface with a big round moon-head, and the Derek Lucas' illustrations for The Secret Seven are, in my opinion, the only SS illustrations of any worth...but even as a child I would have hated these Famous Five interpretations. I know, because the illustrations for Roald Dahl books were the main reason I never wanted to read them as a child.

Rob Houghton wrote:I know, because the illustrations for Roald Dahl books were the main reason I never wanted to read them as a child.

Gosh, you might have missed out on something, Rob. Quentin Blake has now done The Minpins — the last remaining Dahl book he hadn't illustrated (as if the incredibly beautiful and evocative illustrations by Patrick Benson weren't good enough ) — but before he took over the franchise, Dahl had several other illustrators, many of whom were really talented.

As for Laura Ellen Anderson, I wouldn't mind her version of the Famous Five so much if Timmy didn't look bizarrely bloated and deformed, George didn't look like a catty schoolgirl in designer clothes (what happened to her dressing like a boy??) and Julian wasn't a dead ringer for (Where's) Wally!!

I do remember a few other illustrators doing Roald Dahl books - but don't forget that not many Roald Dahl books were actually written when I was a child! Only five or six. Most of his books were written through the 1980's and 1990's (I think?) when I considered myself too old for his books anyway - so I never developed a love for his books -
and the illustrations were definitely partly to blame for this. One I did have as a child was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - which belonged to a neighbour and had (I thought) grotesque illustrations in! I can't recall the illustrator, but it wasn't Quentin Blake.

I agree its really bizarre that 'George' is now depicted as a bit of a girly-girl - certainly not a Tom-boy. Maybe this is because children would just think she was transgender? But its funny how they've feminised her in the illustrations. I think what I find most surprising is the fact that the publishers have chosen such bland depictions of what might be considered some of the countries most iconic fictional characters!

Tony Summerfield wrote:It is not arriving in the shops for another month, but it is a pretty hefty tome, one of the heaviest books that I have got and also something that my scanner can't manage, but all the brown on the front cover is actually in gold. If you haven't already found enough reasons not to buy it the price of £19.99 might settle it!

I am almost embarrassed to say so here, but I think it is a really nice book.

Amazon also offers a kindle edition that's cheaper .

Rob Houghton wrote:I do remember a few other illustrators doing Roald Dahl books - but don't forget that not many Roald Dahl books were actually written when I was a child! Only five or six. Most of his books were written through the 1980's and 1990's (I think?) when I considered myself too old for his books anyway - so I never developed a love for his books -
and the illustrations were definitely partly to blame for this. One I did have as a child was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - which belonged to a neighbour and had (I thought) grotesque illustrations in! I can't recall the illustrator, but it wasn't Quentin Blake.

I'm a year older than Rob and none of the Roald Dahl books I read as a child had Quentin Blake illustrations. I loved Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Danny the Champion of the World, The Magic Finger and The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar. They were startling and ingenious but also quite poignant. I wasn't as keen on Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator and James and the Giant Peach, which I found tiresome. I also had two collections of short stories, Someone Like You and Kiss Kiss.

James and the Giant Peach had wonderfully surreal images by Nancy Ekholm Burkert. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory had quirky illustrations by Faith Jaques who may be the artist you remember, Rob. Her pictures do have a grotesque quality but they're striking and artistic and suit the tone of the story. I really like them.

Getting back to Laura Ellen Anderson, I agree that her style of illustration would suit zany stories for younger children.

The cover in high resolution

Wolfgang wrote:
Amazon also offers a kindle edition that's cheaper .

Thank you for this information, It allows a try out of the book on the kindle trial facility to see if the book is liked enough to consider purchasing.

Fascinating that the book already has about 47 reviews before it has been published!!!

Anita Bensoussane wrote: James and the Giant Peach had wonderfully surreal images by Nancy Ekholm Burkert. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory had quirky illustrations by Faith Jaques who may be the artist you remember, Rob. Her pictures do have a grotesque quality but they're striking and artistic and suit the tone of the story. I really like them.

Its funny what influences us! I can remember the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory book quite well. It was hardback, and bigger than the usual novel size - more like an annual - with black and white line drawings inside. Unfortunately most had been coloured in felt pen by my neighbour - and most faces were coloured green. Maybe that had a negative impact on me!!

Quentin Blake illustrations maybe didn't come in until the 1990's - but I do remember being put off by them when I read a couple of the Roald Dahl stories - The BFG and a couple of others - but I was older then - although my taste in illustrations hasn't really altered since I was a very small child. I always preferred illustrations to be realistic rather than wacky.

Getting back to the Famous Five Treasury - I do think its a big, big shame that the only illustrations in it are the modern wacky versions. Its a pity, but I guess those are the illustrations the publishers want to be associated with The Famous Five, so its to be expected.

Split from another thread.

Rob Houghton wrote:...its interesting how we seem to picture the Five differently when it comes to age. I tend to think of the later Soper illustrations, as in Go Down To the Sea and Mystery Moor, where the 'children' could quite easily pass for teenagers. That's how I picture the Five.

Like a child that is brought up bilingual,I have four distinct versions of The Famous Five continually in my head at the same time:


The 1st time I ever saw them in book one...


The Betty Maxey Five bought by my mum in the early 1970's


The 1977 Annual version of the Five. I was so excited to get this when it first came out!


Eileen Soper's bigger,faster,stronger looking Five - until she was instructed to make the Five look younger again later in the series.

Yes, Pete - those are pretty much my images of The Famous Five, too - minus perhaps the first illustration. I do see them as being like in the later Soper books (before she made them younger again!) and the Betty Maxey and Annual versions - all of which tend to draw them slightly older, as young teenagers, rather than children.

I only ever have one image of the Famous Five in my head: that drawn by Eileen Soper. Perhaps it's an age thing and the fact that I'm a wrinkly.

I totally understand how Eddie,Julie,John and Nigel etc etc feel about this debate.

I think had I been born about twenty years earlier I would not have been able to accept the Betty Maxey illustrations of The Five so readily.
Much like my reaction of distaste today when I see some of the ultra modern depictions for the current generation.

Perhaps from an artistic perspective it is fair to say that Eileen Soper's illustrations of The Famous Five will never be bettered or threatened technically by any future artists depiction of Enid Blyton's Famous Five..

Any fans of the current cartoon artwork please feel free to defend your case.

I don't agree about Eileen Soper's illustrations being 'artistically' or 'technically' superior to other illustrators. I think many other Famous Five artists were 'technically' and 'artistically' better. Eileen Soper was often very 'rough' with her lines in her Famous Five illustrations - often drew people with very angular faces, didn't put much detail on faces, had women with big wide square shoulders, etc etc - but her illustrations create a nostalgic feeling amongst readers who grew up with her work, and also convey that same feeling to those of us who didn't grow up with her.

I still like Eileen Soper's Famous Five work (although I think her work for other books, such as the 'Bright', 'Happy', 'Gay' story book series, was technically and artistically superior and much more accomplished than her FF work) - but I also like several others, who were just as accomplished - in fact most of the illustrators (except perhaps Jolyne Knox) up until 2010 'do it' for me in various degrees.

But I do think Eileen Soper's work for the Famous Five - especially in the later books - is often overrated - sometimes it looks rushed and unfinished, compared to her early Famous Five work, and her other illustrations for short stories.

I bet I'm shot down now!!