Illustrations in books

I personally enjoy good illustrated books; however, on occasion it feels like vision of artists interferes with my imagination. Often, after I have previously read works without illustrations, reading them in illustrated editions is surprising - my personal vision sometimes is very different from what artists imagine.
So I am torn... I love book with illustrations, but it also feels like it is a short cut of a sort and could hinder imagination.

There are also books that provide illustrations of specific places ("Beppo, a Venetian story by Byron in Allen Press's edition had a huge impact on me specifically because of the illustrations there) or costumes/dresses, etc. Arion Press illustrated Hound of Baskervilles with photographs taken at the location. The same approach was taken for Jefferson's Paris Walks. I can think of other books similarly illustrated.

How do you feel about illustrations in books?

>1 booksforreading: I have collected illustrated books for most of the 40+ years that I have collected books. I feel that with many illustrators that their best works are the ones that fit the written story best. It takes less skill to just draw an image than to truly illustrate a story. To match the images to the words of the book. I have seen many lack luster illustrations, and they do nothing for me. But a well illustrated book is a gem. Many would say I am just appreciating the work of a skilled artist, but I have seen many books by skilled artists that just do not hit the mark. A well illustrated book will grab your attention even when the images drawn do not match you vision of the passages of the story.

I love illustrations and have always been able to separate the illustrations from my own imagination until recently when I purchased an old book from 1919 called The Smile-Bringer by William Herschell. This book used posed photos as illustrations and those are hard to ignore.

Illustrator should be well-matched to the book. George Macy was a genius at this. Green Mansions, for instance, is just a sentimental Victorian fantasy without the brilliant Covarrubias illustrations. I don't care generally for illustrations that are too specific to the text, and really, lots of books don't benefit from illustrations in the first place. I prefer artwork that interprets the mood and background of the book. Lynd Ward is one of my favorites.

Unless it's an artist's book, illustrations should be subservient to the text, but complementary to it. And yes, there are books that actually suffer if illustrated. I cannot, for example, fathom why a work of philosophy need be illustrated. Plato does not require visual aids.

Fritz Eichenberg illustrated a lot of the Russian novels for George Macy and he certainly taints my take on the novels themselves (in a good way). I collect books illustrated by Rockwell Kent because I find his work evocative (he did a couple of non-fiction books about Norway or the Arctic regions which are particularly strong, IMHO). Gustav Dore is a genius w/a huge range. I don't think I would have enjoyed Balzac's Droll Stories as much as I have without his often extreme work. I put together a Dore/Droll Stories photo gallery here: https://photos.app.goo.gl/BJzhSVo8uErNseq48

But I also have to agree that there are a lot of illustrators who don't add much. One issue, I think is that certain works lend themselves to illustration (Shakespeare, exotic locales, fantasies) while other, more domestic dramas, sometimes do not. Dore's "Droll" faces, e.g., are beyond anything I would have imagined.

Illustrations often influence my choice of books, esp. in certain genres. I read & reread nineteenth-century English classics, so I have a number of Folio, Heritage, & other editions of those favorites. I have some natural history books with great illustrations; somehow the genre seems to favor that mode. Fantasy & great classics also benefit. One of my favorite illustrators is Barry Moser.
And yes, if the illustrations don't work for me, it's a no-go: the kind of book one picks up, sees a couple of the illustrations, and has that "ick" reaction.
Of course a whole thread could be done on graphic novels & nonfiction. I've always loved them, but don't read them much anymore, since my aging eyes have trouble with the lettering. But, for instance, what would The Rabbi's Cat be without the illustrations? Now that I think of it, maybe "illustrations" isn't the right word for the graphics part of graphic books....

>6 SteveJohnson: If you enjoy Dore's Droll faces, you might like the work of W. Heath Robinson, especially in "The Works of Mr. Francis Rabelais".