Do you want pictures in your books?

[Mira]

I was reading an old favorite and I thought for a moment that if this were in e-book format, it might have pictures in it.

I was wondering, how do people feel about e-books and the possiblity for more art work? Do you want it? Not want it?

I feel decidedly mixed about it, probably more positive than not. I love pictures in children's books - it's hard to imagine Winnie-the-pooh without pictures, for example. It just wouldn't be the same. And I can think of many adult books where I've stared at the cover, using the images to more fully imagine the books. I also like the idea of more writer-artist colloborations.

I guess the downside is sometimes when I see a movie, for example, it just makes me mad if the Director's vision was totally different than mine. That happened in LOTR and Harry Potter - I got really mad at certain things - they just weren't how I envisioned them at all!

So, what do other people think? Pictures? Not pictures? limited pictures? Interactive pictures? Alot of possiblities here...

[knight_tour]

I think it's more that publishers don't want to shell out the money for art. I do think it attracts more readers. I picked up Sword of Shannara the first time because of the cool art inside, and I do dream of my own novel having 15-20 nice pieces of art. I've been commissioning pieces myself, since I love art enough to want the work anyhow even if it never makes it in. Also, if I end up having to give in and self-publish, I could hopefully put the art in (I make sure I secure the rights to do so from the artists).

[Sommer Leigh]

Author Scott Westerfeld just posted a video from BEA where he sat on a panel about writing steampunk. He's on the panel with Cherie Priest and Cory Docotrow and a woman whose name escapes me at the moment. The video and panel are about steampunk, but Scott gives a brief presentation about using art in his books and he points out that once upon a time, art was in most books, adult books, and there was nothing weird about it. The artless, pictureless book is a relatively modern invention. He also talks about the conversation he had with his publisher when he let them know he wanted to use art in the book. It's pretty hysterical.

Anyway, I thought it was timely for your post so I thought I'd share it with you if you were interested on a new perspective. By the way, Scott's newest book Leviathan is filled with artwork, part of which makes the book so much more exciting. Especially since the art is so beautiful.

http://scottwesterfeld.com/blog/2010/05 ... el-at-bea/

[wetair]

That's interesting. But, truthfully, I am not sure I want pictures at all. I think it would interrupt my reading flow.

[Mira]

Yes - Knight Tour, when you said that, I thought of cover art. Alot of people say they just buy for the cover, so that says something about art luring people in.

Summer - that is really interesting! Thanks for sharing the link. :)

Wetair - I think for me it breaks into my own personal world.

But.....there are so many possiblities with art in books. I think I'm leaning toward - yes. Interesting to hear what others think.

[Jessica Peter]

Hm... not particular. I usually like to dream up my own pictures of how characters/settings look, and I'm upset if an illustrator wants to do the job for me. One exception would be the classic 1977 Lord of the Rings calendar pages. I would take that art in my LOTR books any day. And perhaps that makes me a hypocrite...

[jml2]

absolutely not, I would hate to have the pictures in my mind grounded by something concrete, and mundanely real, if you know what I mean. Or ruined by someone else's ideas

[aspiring_x]

i'm divided on this as well. i love good illustration, but i also get annoyed when the artist doesn't have a similar interpretation to mine. however, i find that a lot of the times that is the issue, it is because the artist does not draw from the text. when they are true to the text, illustration is a beautiful thing.
just because someone offers an artistic representation of a scene, doesnt' mean that you have to accept or mold your interpretation to theirs. i think good illustrations can enhance a reader's experience, while poor ones can simply be ignored.
also, i think that anything that provides more opportunities for artists to find work is a good thing. :)

[aspiring_x]

oh! and out of curiosity, how many of you guys already have sketches (or commisioned art like knight tour) for your wip's?
i know i've fiddled with a few sketches.

[Quill]

oh! and out of curiosity, how many of you guys already have sketches for your wip's?

*raises hand*

My dream actually would be to do small pen-and-ink drawings for the title page of each chapter of my YA Historic/Fantasy, a little like Harry Potter, but even simpler.

I wrote a memoir some years back and did about sixty illustrations for it, everything from small sketches to full page pen-and-inks. It's incubating in one of my trunks at the moment. I was really proud of those drawings, though.

I almost require illustrations in the non-fiction I read, in the form of maps, photos, diagrams. So why not for fiction? If it's good enough for Narnia, Winnie, and Wind in the Willows...

[Mira]

aspiring x - yes, I think I agree exactly. I hate art if it disagrees with my vision, or if the artist obviously never read the book, and it's totally off.

But I love it when it hits it exactly right.

And I also like the idea of giving artist's work. :)

[Ishta]

I want pictures in my picture books (obviously) and in my early readers and chapter books, and maybe a few in my MG novel, but I probably won't want them in my YA or adult work. A big part of the pleasure of reading for me is creating the picture myself in my head, and I don't really like it when an artist's interpretation intrudes on that. I want all my readers to be able to create their own visions of my characters and settings.

[bcomet]

Great topic, Mira.

For me, it depends. Of course, for kids' books, yes! For coffee table books, yes!

But for novels? It depends. Mostly, a GREAT cover will work. Sometimes, if it fits, line art at the beginning of a chapter can be good too.
Inserted into a page can work if done well, but it is an art blending the right picture with the narrative.
I want my imagination to conjure too, so I don't want that to be messed with.

What bothers me more/most is when an inserted thing* fights on the page with the narrative.

(*thing: reference, historical quote, helpful quote, inspirational quote, chart, diagram, illustration, etc.)

In both fiction and nonfiction, this is when there are extensive quotes and reference material on the side or at the top of every chapter and/or nearly every page as well crowding the page and pulling me out of the story or idea I am reading or diagrams I have to refer to a few pages up. A lot of nonfiction especially seems to cram these "helpful or historical quotes" in the side column and it makes me dizzy.