Errol McGillivray
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Posted: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:36:14 +0000
As with any profession or hobby, we learn the history of our craft as a major part of our training. We learn a broad history of artists, styles, techniques, and movements from various continents as it pertains to fine art, architecture, and commercial art, and how it relates to the culture of the time. By doing this, we take in the information it took those artists entire lifetimes to come up with.
We learn the theory, techniques, the tools, and are able to guide ourselves through meaningful experimentation and insightful application of these things to grow as artists.
As we move into our specific sectors of the art world, we learn the history of the specific artform. For me, that artform is cartooning. I spend as much time (if not more, as of late) reading researching and exploring theory and history of cartooning, comics, and animation, as I do enjoying comics, animation and cartooning itself. It's part of being an artist.
As someone who is used to seeing people just be plain stupid, it still amazes me that people call themselves artists in the same breath that they show that they know absolutely nothing about the art and could really give half a s**t about knowing anything about the art.
There is a recent thread that sparked the interest in this topic. It's so pathetic that it goes beyond being sad. We all have phases of our "serious" art training/hobby/interest before it moves out of its infancy, where we are fixated on some trait that we find influential. For some, it's super hero comics. We don't actually learn about the artform that comics are, but rather look at the entire collective as a simple set of obvious traits. I can't begin to tell you how many times in the last 15 years I've been told, "Oh, I draw comics." And been shown a sketchbook consisting entirely of the same picture of Spawn and/or Spiderman that was committed to memory and just wretched up on page after page with all the skewing and distortion of someone who never took time to actually learn how to draw. You can substitute Spawn/Spiderman with whatever the flavor of the month is in anime. Back in the day it was Ramna/Lum. Sailor Moon/Goku. InuYasha/Naruto. The list goes on and on. How often have YOU seen someone post art copied from official/professional work? What rough percentage of that time was it anime/manga? What percentage of the time was it Marvel/DC/Image? What percentage of the time was it something else?
People simplify the artform to a set of superficial, trivial traits that they thoughtlessly regurgitate endlessly. They shuffle their deck of traits and deal their crap. How many galleries/sketch dumps have you seen where it's all the same character/pose/shot/colour scheme/use of line/use of shape (or lack thereof on both sides).
There are 52 cards in a deck. Two colours. Four shapes. You like red. Remove what's not red and you've removed half of your shape options. Remove what's not a heart and you're lost all shape options. You've gone from a trait set of 52, with three possible means of making variation, to 13 possibilities, leaving the most subtle difference as the only means of variation. Say red is the trait that defines your art. You've exponentially reduced the possibilities in your work before you've even made a mark on the page.
The same people are critiquing others by slapping a redline rubber stamp over more expressive, insightful, and/unique work than theirs has ever been. They encourage fledgling artists into the same sinkholes that they are so deep in they can't even see that there is a world outside of the pit. They discourage experimentation, exploration, and problem solving as they suggest tutorials and quick tools that appear to soothe symptoms of s**t art rather than looking deeper to cure the disease that causes the problem. They thrive on tutorials and redlines that allow them to copy another's work, rather than seeking to understand where theory that makes the techniques in the tutorial effective. (And this is being VERY generous. Most tutorials the average artist online makes are s**t out after eating already regurgitated s**t. That's what focusing superficial traits will get you.)
These people have no appreciation for the power of image, because they don't understand it. They don't care. They just want to make something that shows them those superficial traits they so admire.
I'm sure most of us have had some kind of dance with this devil, regardless of how long or short. I, the wonderfully skilled artists I know, and many professionals I admire are no exception. The difference between an artist and a so-called "anime artist" is that they've seen the bullshit for what it is, felt their shame, and started to give a s**t about the what's under the surface. They explore in their art. They evaluate. They research. They create with purpose. They grow. Style is irrelevant. If your artwork has an anime inspired look to it, it doesn't matter when you're an artist FIRST.
There are plenty of people that argue about what makes someone an artist. I think art is as simple as a thoughtful creation with the purpose of engaging an audience. Even if that audience is just yourself. The key words in this are "thoughtful" and "engage". Regardless of what you create, you should be an artist before you are any other qualifier. I call myself a cartoonist, because that best describes what I am most likely to do and most capable of doing, but "cartoonist" is the tail of the funnel while it's head is "artist".
Long story short, learn about what you're taking an interest in. Learn about the theories that make what you do work. Learn about the methods, tools, and techniques. Explore and experiment with them. Learn the culture of your craft. Knowledge is power. Your "s**t art" factor is inversely proportional how much you know. If you haven't learned to appreciate the power of image/word/sound, then chances are, you're a s**t artist/writer/musician.
We learn the theory, techniques, the tools, and are able to guide ourselves through meaningful experimentation and insightful application of these things to grow as artists.
As we move into our specific sectors of the art world, we learn the history of the specific artform. For me, that artform is cartooning. I spend as much time (if not more, as of late) reading researching and exploring theory and history of cartooning, comics, and animation, as I do enjoying comics, animation and cartooning itself. It's part of being an artist.
As someone who is used to seeing people just be plain stupid, it still amazes me that people call themselves artists in the same breath that they show that they know absolutely nothing about the art and could really give half a s**t about knowing anything about the art.
There is a recent thread that sparked the interest in this topic. It's so pathetic that it goes beyond being sad. We all have phases of our "serious" art training/hobby/interest before it moves out of its infancy, where we are fixated on some trait that we find influential. For some, it's super hero comics. We don't actually learn about the artform that comics are, but rather look at the entire collective as a simple set of obvious traits. I can't begin to tell you how many times in the last 15 years I've been told, "Oh, I draw comics." And been shown a sketchbook consisting entirely of the same picture of Spawn and/or Spiderman that was committed to memory and just wretched up on page after page with all the skewing and distortion of someone who never took time to actually learn how to draw. You can substitute Spawn/Spiderman with whatever the flavor of the month is in anime. Back in the day it was Ramna/Lum. Sailor Moon/Goku. InuYasha/Naruto. The list goes on and on. How often have YOU seen someone post art copied from official/professional work? What rough percentage of that time was it anime/manga? What percentage of the time was it Marvel/DC/Image? What percentage of the time was it something else?
People simplify the artform to a set of superficial, trivial traits that they thoughtlessly regurgitate endlessly. They shuffle their deck of traits and deal their crap. How many galleries/sketch dumps have you seen where it's all the same character/pose/shot/colour scheme/use of line/use of shape (or lack thereof on both sides).
There are 52 cards in a deck. Two colours. Four shapes. You like red. Remove what's not red and you've removed half of your shape options. Remove what's not a heart and you're lost all shape options. You've gone from a trait set of 52, with three possible means of making variation, to 13 possibilities, leaving the most subtle difference as the only means of variation. Say red is the trait that defines your art. You've exponentially reduced the possibilities in your work before you've even made a mark on the page.
The same people are critiquing others by slapping a redline rubber stamp over more expressive, insightful, and/unique work than theirs has ever been. They encourage fledgling artists into the same sinkholes that they are so deep in they can't even see that there is a world outside of the pit. They discourage experimentation, exploration, and problem solving as they suggest tutorials and quick tools that appear to soothe symptoms of s**t art rather than looking deeper to cure the disease that causes the problem. They thrive on tutorials and redlines that allow them to copy another's work, rather than seeking to understand where theory that makes the techniques in the tutorial effective. (And this is being VERY generous. Most tutorials the average artist online makes are s**t out after eating already regurgitated s**t. That's what focusing superficial traits will get you.)
These people have no appreciation for the power of image, because they don't understand it. They don't care. They just want to make something that shows them those superficial traits they so admire.
I'm sure most of us have had some kind of dance with this devil, regardless of how long or short. I, the wonderfully skilled artists I know, and many professionals I admire are no exception. The difference between an artist and a so-called "anime artist" is that they've seen the bullshit for what it is, felt their shame, and started to give a s**t about the what's under the surface. They explore in their art. They evaluate. They research. They create with purpose. They grow. Style is irrelevant. If your artwork has an anime inspired look to it, it doesn't matter when you're an artist FIRST.
There are plenty of people that argue about what makes someone an artist. I think art is as simple as a thoughtful creation with the purpose of engaging an audience. Even if that audience is just yourself. The key words in this are "thoughtful" and "engage". Regardless of what you create, you should be an artist before you are any other qualifier. I call myself a cartoonist, because that best describes what I am most likely to do and most capable of doing, but "cartoonist" is the tail of the funnel while it's head is "artist".
Long story short, learn about what you're taking an interest in. Learn about the theories that make what you do work. Learn about the methods, tools, and techniques. Explore and experiment with them. Learn the culture of your craft. Knowledge is power. Your "s**t art" factor is inversely proportional how much you know. If you haven't learned to appreciate the power of image/word/sound, then chances are, you're a s**t artist/writer/musician.
