/lit/ - Literature

>>3987260

>>3987264

>>3987270

>>3987272

>>3987278

Kind of sucks, I grew up with the good ones

They're all so blue!

>>3987260
>Scholastic sanctioned the New York Times bestselling author and illustrator Kazu Kibuishito revamp the book covers to celebrate the 15th anniversary of the U.S. publication of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the first novel in the seven-book series.

these are p good. the american ones are also p nice. not how i imagined thestrals to look like.

I like them but I wish the titles were written in different fonts that fit the theme of the art like the older ones were. Just a small touch that I really liked about the old ones. White Times New Roman (or whatever that is) is rather bland.

I actually think these are much nicer. Don't love the Chamber one one but all in all they're well done.

The American covers aren't as good as the English ones.

>>3987324
yea it looks like they're going to the weasley's house and fawkes is kewler

These new ones make me feel like I'm about to watch some fucking anime. Also the author and title are placed poorly and go over some of the highlights of the actual art. Trying not to look at this with nostalgia, but man the old ones are WAY better.

>Harry Potter And The Blatant Spoiler On The Front Cover

Goddamn the American covers are ugly as shit

Good, the old covers were super ugly. These new ones are very nice comparatively.

>>3987381
the artist is japanese

>>3987388
that's both qt

the old ones were terrible.
the french covers are relatively tasteful

>>3987399
Did you know they also translated them into American? They talk about fucking "English muffins" in one of them.

All because Americans are so desperate not to be exposed to foreign cultures.

As a Swede this is my favorite ever.

Fucking beautiful.

>>3987467
whoa, this is fucking badass, please post more

>>3987467
this is good tho I like the American one w/ the fire swirls

>>3987504

>>3987448
This one I love

>I made new artist friends/I want to sell to collectors

My nostalgia autism is never going to let go of the feel and look of the original Philosopher's Stone

I'm talking I remember the literal day I first picked it up and read it in 3rd grade on a beanbag

>>3987628
Hot damn, that art style is baller as fuck.

>>3987660
The cover of the fifth one really captures the vibe of the book.
The artist is named Jean Claude Gotting.

>HP
>good

>>3987745
I like these paintings, but what is up with Hermione's face and Harry's dead eyes?

they lack charm

>>3987781
that's his style I guess.

>>3987776
I read them again recently for the nostalgia and they hold up pretty well, plus there are literary references you can't catch as a kid. Joanne Rowling knows her stuff.

>>3987792
lana del rey and salem?

>the new covers will be sold in a special box set available on Aug. 27th.

I didn't really think the old ones were that great, and there's no nostalgia really because I grew up with the british version, so I'm fine with the change. they look nice!

>>3987789
for you, but the new generation of potter readers will think theyre charming enough

>>3987628
>Harry Potter and The Relics of the Dead

They even improved the title.

this, pretty much >>3988017

I'm guessing she didn't make enough money with those other two books she wrote after HP so she's gonna milk this cow for as long as people are willing to throw their money away

>>3988067
Doubt she has anything to do with this, this tends to be in the hands of the publishers, who are hardly less eager to get rich.

>>3988067
It's a fact that the book she wrote under a pseudonym tanked. Once JK "leaked" that she wrote it, sales shot up 500,000%, no exaggeration, five hundred thousand percent.

She'll be coasting through the rest of her literary career purely through name recognition.

>>3988092
It didn't tank; it did quite well for a first novel.

Thing is, if selling 1500 hardcover copies is doing well for a new author, how the heck is anyone but JK Rowling or Stephen King gonna make a living writing stuff?

orignials are way better

Sad.

>>3988103
>it did quite well for a first novel.

It barely sold one thousand copies. That's not good. Ten thousand copies is good. One thousand copies is abysmal.

>>3988097
the sales were just as good as the sales of Philosopher's Stone when that first came out

>>3988116
Isn't ten thousand copies the benchmark for paperback?

>>3987260
nothing will beat the originals
these are cool and all but it looks like harry potter is supposed to be a jap cartoon or something

>artist is japanese

oh wow it would have created so much butthurt if he had turned the characters from HP into moé manga cartoons

The old covers have a slightly ugly illustrative style, but I like their rough, hand-made quality. The new covers are too perfect, they don't seem like 'book covers'. They definitely seem like concept art for a video game or something.

It reminds me of the proliferation of electronic music on the radio. People don't want to be reminded that imperfection exists. They want to be surrounded by a sanitary world of luxury.

I like them better than the original American ones, still prefer my original British covered ones though

>>3988143
The Japanese covers are actually pretty cool.

They're pretty good, but if the movies weren't so successful I would worry about how they reveal pivotal scenes and revelations which should evoke a sense of wonder or awe and reduce them simply to looked-for milestones.

These are the best covers IMO

Yes, they're very cute covers for a very cute series of childrens books.

>>3988348
Those are great.

>>3988467
/lit/ is srs bzns. Let's make another thread about why infinite jest was great/terrible and why postmodernism is the best/a sham.

>>3988467
So you're saying I'll look cute reading them

Pre ordering 10 copies

>>3988467
So? God forbid our hands get tainted by the touch of anything that's not part of the Western canon.

Man, the art style of those early American ones is so late-90s. I have no idea what the word for it is (pastel cubism??), but I remember it being everywhere - in Cinnabon, Starbucks, clip-art, on album covers and book jackets.

Pic related, by the Harry Potter artist.

And lol at the new ones...orange/blue everywhere.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OrangeBlueContrast

The new Goblet of Fire cover looks decent. Also, on a related note, if I've only read about half of SS, should I go back and read the entire series, /lit/? That was over 10 years ago and the books are so cheap these days... Are they worth reading if I haven't read any of them before?

>>3988587
>clipart

oh god hahaha

But I know what you mean, they're sort of ugly but charming at the same time.

>>3988348
when I first looked at those I thought they said Harry potato

>>3988587
Say what you want about the old American covers. They may have been bad but at least they had a certain charm. The new ones are just dull and crazy fucking blue

>implying these aren't the original and true

>>3988611
Read the first three, it starts showing some serious cracks book four.

>>3988644
The American ones are better except for the first one.

>>3988644
But the original Scholastics are so wonderfully tacky.

>>3988644
Why does he look like he gonna get hit by a train in the first one?

Don't EVER get the Japanese books. They ruined all the fucking dialogue. The illustrations got raped and became a 2deep4u modern art shitpile.

>>3988677
Are you nipponese or something?

>>3988638

>>3987296
this.

i much preferred the old covers that had their own sort of color scheme each time.

I like the style of the new covers, but it doesn't look like Harry changes at all in them.

The series takes place over seven years at least, and the old covers reflect that as Harry looks older in each one, but in these it looks like he's still an 11 year old boy when he should be 18.

I don't know if I want this.
On the one hand it looks a lot more polished.
On the other hand it feels a lot more generic.

>>3987388
To be fair, original 1,2,3 spoiled more

Eh. I prefer the old covers, but I don't know whether that's just because they were the covers when I was a kid.

More than that, I don't think it matters much. The books are still the books.

>>3989060
1 doesn't really spoil anything except the dog's existence. 3 doesn't spoil anything since Harry rides that bird thing both early in the book and late in the book if I remember correctly.

2nd spoils Fawkes being in the Chamber, yeah.

>>3988644
>British covers
>Good

>1st picture
Look at that dumb wizard getting hit by a train
>2nd picture
Looks like a child drawing
>7th
Looks like a poster for The Goonies

>>3989084
>Looks like a poster for The Goonies

That was a good-ass movie tho

I didn't read the books until I was out of my Christan's household. So I don't have any nostalgia glasses.

First 5 are better than original. 6th is even. 7th new one isn't that great, but so is the original

>>3988028
It rather means The Relics of Death
Your translation would've been "Les reliques des morts" in french

They are terrible man, they arn't raw enough like the old ones. They look too polished and modern if that makes any sense.

It's like how Banana's in Bananas in Pyjamas used to look and how terrible the animation is now(I forget the word for it).

>>3987381
Exactly, a crappy too polished one.

>>3987467
Holy fuck that is good. Why did us Australians(which ever covers those are from)get such crap ones in comparison!?

>>3987637
How comfy was that beanbag?

>>3988672
Because you can walk in front of the trains at King's Cross station. It's the end of the line so there are bumpers in front of the trains and the tracks end.

>>3988097
But do you know if she gave a shit? She is rich as hell. She just likes to write. She liked having the pseudonym and was liking the reviews she was getting before she got found out. Why are you guys so pessimistic.

>>3988348
Deathly Hallows looks ridiculous with the wheelie motorbike. The art style is really really cool though in all of them.

>>3987504
Tapia's covers make most of the other ones look pretty retarded.

>>3988611
I think they're worth a shot. Book three is my favorite, but I think you should read the previous two first.

Then again, I read the books growing up (the first came out when I was like in fourth or fifth grade), so I do have some thick nostalgia goggles.

>>3990026
My jaw dropped at how beautiful these are

The new covers look nice but everything else being posted here is definitely blowing them away. But of the original Harry Potter covers I really loved the one for Goblet of Fire, I liked the color scheme and the way the secondary characters were placed behind Harry.

>>3987339
This
>realizing that ameritards replaced "philosopher's stone" with "sorcerer's stone" because the american demographic would be put off by the mention of philosophy

>>3990026
>those last three
they make the series look way better than they were

>>3990198
lol really?
truly an anti-intellectual country

>>3990227
Both the American and British covers have been posted in this thread,see for yourself.
There were other annoying changes as well such as the word "fringe" changed to "bangs"
>Amerishoots need an English to English translation to read a children's book.

Man, I used to love these books.

I'm pretty autistic(or something like that, but maybe I'm just a loser) so I have no friends, and I loved these books because they would let me enter a world where I wasn't a loser.

Plus my brother really liked them too, so we could talk about it together.
I think I read the first one in 2nd grade, it was so awesome.

I know I'm a pleb/prole, you don't have to tell me by the way.

>>3990198

Was the name ever officially changed to Sorcerer's Stone? It seems I never hear it called Philosopher's Stone anymore.

>>3990288
It's probably because of the Harry Potter movies that came out.

>>3990198
The french translation is Harry Potter at Wizards' School

>>3990295
So did they dub 'The Philosophers Stone' film so the cast say Sorcerers stone instead?

>>3990198
I laughed heartly. Thanks for the comment.

t. a non-american poster

>>3990339
>released in the United States, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

>>3990324
I think the point is that the American publishers were condescending enough to think that their 'cultureless offspring' required a translation of something in the same language, whereas British kids just read unchanged american books e.g. 'The Mouse and The Motorcycle' didn't get changed to 'The Field-mouse and the Motorbike'. With other languages the translations tend to be freer e.g. 'a la recherche du temps perdu'' got changed to ' 'A remembrance of things past' to try and convey its general meaning to a British Public versed in Shakespeare - as English lacked the pun on perdu, the translator tried to simulate a similar impression by alluding to a sonnet about loss.

>>3990351
I seem to remember close ups of Maggie Smith and Richard Harris saying 'Philosopher's Stone'. Did they get some random impressionist to dub it as 'Sorcerers Stone', or did they make these esteemed actors film the same scene twice just for the americans?

>>3990283
When I was in second grade the school library did a thing where classes drew straws from a cup and whichever kids grabbed a straw with a mark on it received the first Harry Potter book. I was one of those kids who won, it was awesome.

I definitely obsessed over the series for a couple years but my interest dwindled a lot around the time Order of the Phoenix came out. I never finished Half Blood Prince either, but now this thread is making me want to go to a used bookstore and get hardcovers of all the books.

Harry Potter lit virgin here. I'm going to finally get into reading this damn series. Should i wait for this new cover art box set or go for the original one. As you can see, nostalgia has no effect on me

>As of yesterday, we’ve now seen all seven new Harry Potter covers.

>And now, the back cover reveals begin.


>On their official Twitter account this morning, Scholastic released the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone back cover. It depicts Harry standing at the Mirror of Erised where we see his parents. It includes a quote from Albus Dumbledore

UK is also getting new book covers. Though these are more aimed at adults

>Seeking out a new era of adult readers, Bloomsbury and J.K. Rowling announced today that the Harry Potter books would be re-published in paperback format

>>3991346
I like this style, it looks pretty.

>>3991363
i like these illustrations but it feels overdesigned.

>>3988131
> nothing will beat the originals.
Th new sorcerer's stone cover does just that. Original cover looks like the most cheap thing ever compared to that image of Harry and Hagrid.

>>3988456
What year? What country?

>>3987278
I actually like this one a lot.

>>3991346
>The new back cover for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets in the United States has been released.

>The back cover depicts Harry in the titular location standing alone as he stares at the iconic Chamber of Secrets. A quote from Lord Voldemort in the form of Tom Marvolo Riddle is included: