08.11.2005: Ranting: On the Value of Art
(from my journal, 03-22-2004)
As I waited in a short executive-class line for a croissant sandwich this afternoon, I couldn't help but notice a couple of trendy urban hipsters having a discussion on the validity of my particular genre specialty of art. Well, not mine exclusively, but the one I subscribe to (or am limited to) and define my personal style with: Cartooning. Comics. Animation Style. How ever you slice it, they referred to the pen and ink world of visual distillation and art as entertainment. "There are these guys that swear up and down that what they're doing is an actual valid form of art," the one with the freakishly huge hair and equally imposing glasses said. "It boggles my mind. It's an insult to me AND my art," spilled forth the other, more hoity-toity of the two.
Fighting back the almost overwhelming impulse to jump over the divider and beat them mercilessly with the heavily braceleted, severed arm of the hideously be-speckled one, I quickly paid for my lunch and rattled over to the glass faced elevator. On my way up to the twelfth floor, I stared at them with a sniper's eyes and imagined them buggering each other on a stack of overtly vaginal O'Keefe prints while discussing the art inherent in their act- "This is sooo controversial and post-modern," grunts the catcher, prompting the pitcher to exclaim, "Bathe in the godly light in the irony of our ground breaking social statement!!!"
The definition of Art (with a capital "A") is something of a touchy subject for most. The very nature of the word assumes there is no ultimate, all-satisfying description that would not cause the art dork equivalent of a FIFA riot. When posed with the question of the validity of my own work as Art, I cannot give a completely satisfying answer. Does it speak a grand truth to society? Does it convey anything that aspires to be anything higher? Is it a reflection of my personal state? Well, no. My art does none of that. Does that mean it is less important that the guy who paints cow fetuses in oil on a rabbit fat gessoed, hand-stretched canvas to protest the children of some far-off war? I don't think so.
My art is important to me. It is important enough to me that my entire life is devoted to exploring and refining my ability to make it. Creating my Art is what drives me. It is a passion that will rule all else in my life, until the day I die. My subject and choice of genre are irrelevant. It is in the act of creating that I'm hopelessly in love with. And like any deep relationship there are times that are frustrating, tiring, discouraging and infinitely difficult enough to make you lie to yourself and proclaim that you're done with Art. But that never happens. I stick around like an abused spouse. Why? Because I love it, that's why.
No art had moved me quite like my own. Not because I'm any good at it, or because of what I'm drawing, mind you- But because drawing it both consumes and defines me. I can draw Kermit the Frog smoking a joint with the Snorks and feel exactly the same about it. I can draw something steeped in deep, personal fears and emotion and give it away to a stranger and feel the exact same way. The end product, as far as I'm concerned is disposable... and in that sense, I agree completely with our two euro-trash punks in the first paragraph. But is it any less important than what "Jet Set Radio Boy," creates. Nope. It's just as valid. Because I know it is. Because I'm valid.
[back to top]
08.11.2005: Comics and the Public
(from my journal, 12-08-2004)
Comics have a long way to go to become a successful form of mass market entertainment. How do we go about helping that along? Education, better marketing, and a shift in perception.
Take cinema for example. A flashy, brainless movie like "National Treasure" (100 M+, first WEEK, DOMESTIC) makes more money than "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" (34M TOTAL DOMESTIC). Why? Was it the marketing? Star power? Director? I really can't say for sure. The fact of the matter is, in a week's time, the money this cliched, over-blown, grossly inferior product, flew way beyond what a truly great film EVER made at the box office. This sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME in Hollywood.
Happens all the time in comics, too. In comics, despite being a completely different monster, the same seems to hold true. Like Gondry and Kaufman did with 'Sunshine,' plenty of creators are pushing the envelope of storytelling with the small press and indie stuff. Something like 'Blankets' comes out and everyone's crowded around the big Jim Lee Batman issue on the rack.
What we need to find is a balance. We need something progressive, with universal accessibility and appeal that challenges people to pick it up. Something that has all of the shiny cool of the bigger stuff, but with the intellect, risky design, and sensibility of some of the smaller stuff.
We haven't found our "Titanic," "Incredibles," or "Goodfellas" just yet, I'm afraid. And when we do, that's only a small part of the battle. The rest of it is selling it to all of those people that DON'T read comics. Yeah, there's more of them than there are of us and that makes matters even more difficult.
And let me add this:
We need to change how people think about comics. Remove the stigma attached to it. Make it less an "our club" mentality and more of an "everyone" situation. Comics aren't dorky, stupid, or exclusively for children. A lot of them are more intelligent, compelling and satisfying than most of the movies and TV shows that eat up the public's money. People need to know that.
How do we turn reading comics into a social activity? Reading is one of the least social things you can do. And because of the small audience, reading comics is even less social. Do we need to move comics out of the comics shops? Maybe there's a way to change the shops into a more social environment? If that is a possibility, then how do we coax John and Jane Q. Public into those shops?
Well, to start, we need more press releases to large entertainment and news mags. More smart, high-visibility marketing. Better market positioning. Less focus on the direct market and more on getting into larger retailers. More radio spots or radio coverage. More mass media integration. Better brand equity. Better product, ancillary and tie-in product. More endorsements.
We need to educate the public and shift perception. We need to change with the times. Same way iTunes and iPod did when people stopped buying CDs. And we need to do it now.
[back to top]
08.11.2005: El Cuervo Blanco: Process
(from my journal, 03-21-2004)
How did I do this this this this this and this?
First I draw a sketch of what I'd like the scene to look like. Next, I go out to a location and snap several digital photos of several different angles that keep as close to the sketch as possible. Back at home, I draw the same sketch over the digital photo (in Photoshop with a Wacom tablet) just to make sure it still works.
Once I'm satisfied with the composition, I'll then digitally manipulate the photo- add or remove elements, lengthen walls, remove distracting shadows, etc... Until it best jives with the composition. After that, I grayscale it, adjust brightness and contrast, add depth of field blurs and make my final background touch-ups.
After all of that, I print out the sketch (without background) in 15% cyan on 400 series Strathmore bristol board for inking. Once I ink the drawing, I scan it in, cut out the lines, fill the figures with white and bring them into the photo. I then spend a lot of time blending them into the scene- making them interact with objects, dropping shadows, adding blurs and light spills, etc...
Sometimes, I'll even ink some extra lines and/or fills into the photo, depending on the effect I want to achieve.
That's pretty much it. Overall the process can take several hours, depending on the complexity of the image.
[back to top] |
|
