Wimpy Stories to Tell in the Dark

The Web has been abuzz with the news that Alvin Schwartz's notorious SCARY STORIES TO TELL IN THE DARK has been emasculated for its 30th anniversary edition. That children's book's absolutely, tee-totally horrifying illustrations by the unique and brilliant Stephen Gammell have been replaced by much softer, non-threatening drawings by some OTHER artist. The book's publisher has obviously completely missed the point-- the SCARY STORIES series' immense popularity and longevity are due in large part to Gammell's terrifying visions of decaying, ethereal, grotesque, and genuinely scary creatures. At times, his drawings were all the creepier for what he hinted it, like in one drawing where a small white glow in the middle of a dimly-lit room intimates that something truly awful is about to happen.

What compelled the publishers to ruin the book like this? Did they think that the originals were too scary? Director Roger Corman had the ending of one of his film's badly re-cut by its producers, who claimed that IT was too scary. Corman later remarked that de-fanging something because it's too scary is like taking a comedy and making it more serious because it's too funny.

I recommend that everyone reading this boycott the new edition. The new illustrations aren't badly done-- they are just the wrong illustrations for this particular book. I'm not blaming the new illustrators-- I blame the publishers. Replacing Gammell's unforgettable works was the poorest possible aesthetic choice that they could have made, bar none.