[ SECRET POST #2710 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2710 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 029 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know why they'd fix what ain't broke, personally. Those older illustrations were the stuff of nightmares. I loved them.

[brandiweed.livejournal.com]

"This series is listed as being the most challenged series of books from 1990–1999[1] and seventh most challenged from 2000-2009 [2] by the American Library Association for its violence. The surreal and nightmarish illustrations contained within are also a frequently challenged component of the original books."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scary_Stories_to_Tell_in_the_Dark

Nuf sed?

[(Anonymous)]

I suppose if you think being a challenged book is a flaw of some kind that needs fixing, I'd see the point of changing it. I find those banned book lists are compiled by the sort of people whose judgement in literature is so puritanical, I wouldn't value their opinion at all.

[brandiweed.livejournal.com]

I think from a bottom-line standpoint Scholastic just said "Fine, you fucking pearl-clutchers." Better the stories should get read in some form than not at all.

(I sometimes wonder if Brett Helquist would have liked to do spookier art but got mandates from on high dictating the content. Without production notes, we'll never know.)

[(Anonymous)]

This series has been very consistently popular since its publication over three decades ago. I don't think it's a case of having to change the illustrations or nobody gets to read them at all. Clearly plenty of people get to read them despite the illustrations.

[brandiweed.livejournal.com]

True, but I suspect some libraries really did want copies that people wouldn't have a moral panic over. You'd be surprised what gets successfully petitioned for removal by moral guardian types (or just plain defaced or stolen).

[brandiweed.livejournal.com]

Oh, and don't get me wrong-- I think the original illustrations are FAR more interesting. I'm just noting what the probable line of reasoning was with the revisions.