In fact, this is a picture of my childhood copy, which is now the copy I have in my classroom. An appropriately dressed 11-12 year old orphan girl from the early 1900's. Good.
And if she wasn't the girl in the cover, then in my head, Anne Shirley is this girl:
Then I saw a post by Tara of Shhh....Not While I'm Reading about an updated cover of ANNE OF GREEN GABLES, and also this article from ABC News, and I saw shocked by what I saw!
This is NOT the Anne Shirley I know! When Anne moved to the Island, she was like 11 or 12. This girl isn't 11 or 12. The Anne Shirley I know is a redhead, "Carrots" as Gilbert Blythe used to call her. This girl isn't. The Anne Shirley I know is somewhat plain in looks. This girl is not. She's, dare I say it, sexy. In the early 1900's, young women wore dresses. This girl is not. Anne would not wear a plaid shirt, and I'm assuming, jeans. Anne is a proper young lady.
I'm appalled by this new update. I understand that covers need to be updated after a time as artwork gets outdated, etc. But to stray so far from the original that it doesn't even evoke the original is stupid! Boo to the creative art director who signed off on this one.
If ANNE OF GREEN GABLES was on the banned book list before, just wait until concerned parents see the "hot" new cover.
I'll pass on updating my library.
Yea I don't like this cover. It is clearly not giving the right impressions for the book!
ReplyDeleteI saw this too, it is SO wrong!
ReplyDeleteLolita of Green Gables--YIKES!!!
ReplyDeleteand totally WRONG for all the in story reasons you mentioned
Riley and I agree with your opinion. That girl is lovely, but she is not Anne, and the entire "vibe" is wrong.
ReplyDelete