Anne asked these questions in her gallery thread (1) How come the covers seemed to migrate intact from one language version to another? and (2) Can you say anything about the cover art in the 60s and 70s?
First of all, I was mostly involved on the production side rather than the bean-counting process, but I suspect it all boils down to copyright law and cost accounting. Any of the members who are published authors (like Rob) or someone who’s worked in the business end of publishing could probably provide a more cogent answer.
Re (1) “Cobbler’s Dream”, for example--This has been produced by a number of different publishers over a substantial period of time. Presumably each house had to negotiate independently with the Dickens estate for the right to publish the intellectual property in X language. Each house also had to deal with ownership of illustrations and photographs--if the rights to those were included, then the cover would likely have remained the same; if not, then new art would have had to be developed. I hope this explains (in a nutshell) why some covers are the same and others not.
Re (2) 1960s/1970s children’s books cover art in general: According to Wikipedia, “Cobbler’s Dream” was intended for an adult (or at least young adult) audience. Yet, as I understand it, the Follyfoot television series was originally targeted toward younger adolescents, which I interpret as the 12 (old enough to grasp basic interpersonal relationships outside the family) to 16 year old range (beginning to form romantic attachments and developing an understanding of humanitarian issues). Obviously the romantic angle--mild though it was--attracted older teenagers. (I’ve only read this one book so far but it seems that the Paul/Steve and Dora relationship never progressed beyond a certain fondness in any of the subsequent books.) One has to remember that a veritable cultural revolution occurred between 1963 and 1971; a young teenager in 1963 was far less sophisticated than one approaching adolescence eight years later. This might explain why the covers seemed to transition from illustrations (appealing to younger kids) to photocentric themes (older teenagers would be far more likely to purchase a book with their favorite heartthrob on the cover).
Anyway... that’s my story and I’m sticking to it! Further illumination from those of you who are already accomplished children's authors (which wouldn't include me!), and the many artists among us, would be welcome... your perceptions of what constitutes appropriate and attractive cover art and so forth.
Considering how much the world has changed since the final Follyfoot book was written in 1976, it sure would be interesting to see what a contemporary designer would come up with for a 2010 reprint of “Cobbler’s Dream”!!! • Sheryl