This revised campaign poster was created by Patrick Corrigan of The Toronto Star, which I found by way of TruthDig. I'm not sure if he means it to be taken as a pro-Obama or anti-Obama statement.At least Corrigan has solid drawing chops. If Shepherd Fairey could say the same, he would have fewer legal troubles right now.
Speaking of Shep -- for me, his famed "HOPE" poster provided one of the first signs that Obama was the wrong choice. Should we not have been wary of a political candidate whose image was crafted by a graphic artist best known for copping visual riffs from totalitarian propagandists?(He does so all in the name of irony, of course.)
Let's compare a recent Shep piece to one of the Soviet posters that inspired his work. To me, one factor stands out: Whoever did that wash painting of Lenin was a fine craftsman. (I wonder how the original was accomplished, technically. Was it gouache? Was the tower painted by hand?)
By contrast, Shep's Uncle Sam is poorly drawn. Don't get me wrong: It's a very nice design, overall. But the piece would have more punch if the draftsmanship did not convey amateurism. The face looks off, and the positioning of the hands is ludicrously wrong -- clear evidence of a swipe. (Hold out your hands as though cradling a pile of skulls. Now look down. Where are your thumbs? Now look again at Shep's poster.)
Please understand that I'm not talking (at this moment) about the poster's message. I'm talking about art, not literature. If you don't know the difference -- and most current art critics don't -- please don't comment on this post, because you'll only make me angry.
Of course, by this point you should all know my attitude toward the guys who say "I'm not going to bother to learn how to draw, but I'm still going to make millions in the art game." To be fair, Fairey has a great design sense. Most of his tricks -- the distressed look, the subtle patterns, the sunburst rays -- are pretty easy to do in Photoshop. If you have the program and a decent system, I would need only a couple of days to teach you how to turn out a Fairey. But let's give the guy credit -- his eye is good. If only he would spend a few hours each day doing figure sketching, the way Gil Kane used to do...
That sort of thing still matters to old schoolers like me.
9 comments:
After decades of trying, I still can't draw people close to correct. I'm okay (not good) with things-- but my people look like mutants. So, I do admire those people who have the gift (and/or) training to draw well.
On messages-- it's rather like the writer who has brilliant prose but its riddled with misspellings and comma errors. Hard to see the message beyond the mistakes.
Years ago, I had a game I dearly loved to play but had to quit because it was driving me crazy. When the computer's turn came, it would hold on the screen the message "Major Al Logarithm Responding."
It might be true that "If you have the program and a decent system, I would need only a couple of days to teach you how to turn out a Fairey", but the same might be said of using After Effects to create a Saul Bass title sequence.
Personally, I think that there's a real cultural danger that new technologies are essentially diminishing and diluting the accomplishments of the trailblazing artists like Saul Bass or Tex Avery or Georges Melies, whose work the new software seems often seems almost designed to mimic.
In my mind this sort of technolological dissipation reduces the value and significance of Fairey's later (post 1994 or so) work, which to me looks much more like the work of an art school student than the original "ATG has a Posse" art, which I believe that Fairey did a lot of, um, when he was an art student.
I blame David Salle for dearth of refined draftsmanship in contemporary art. no one wants to draw an egg for two hours a day anymore.. but Banksy is different, he can draw, he's versatile and a little more thought outthan Fairey
Can't agree about Salle. To me, he's the anti-Shep.
Salle can draw, when he puts his mind to it. (Yes, I know that he often uses photo reference: Not a sin.) But his work is content-free -- and often just plain ugly. Discordant elements tossed into a meaningless exercise in poor composition.
By contrast, Shep can't draw very well, but he has a good design sense, he can create beautiful compositions, and his works have interesting content.
Between the two, I much prefer Shep. But we still wait for an artist whose manner is a good match for his matter.
Hey, you know who can REALLY paint? Odd Nerdrum.
http://www.nerdrum.com/
Naturally, he proudly calls himself a kitsch peddler, since, having talent and an appreciation for craftsmanship, he cannot possibly be an artist as that term is defined at present.
Craftsmanship-wise, what I perceive includes eyes which seem to convey that the subject of the poster above would as soon blast a human (you) to death as look at you--"stone-cold killer eyes." [Eyes rarely encountered on the faces of professional shooters in the U.S. Armed Forces, I would argue. Their minds are mission focused.]
Anyone with the chops to change faces to "mission-oriented and moral" with a few fluent swipes has my great admiration. More so if they can avoid ideologue overtones.
I just put the one we see above side by side with the original "Hope" poster--where the eyes are looking, the tilt of the head... different "red" colors... interesting.
The Uncle Sam poster recalls the image of a banker, or a Wall Street investor, I think. One would expect such person to display gold, bonds, or money, but instead the artist chooses skulls. A great juxtaposition, imo.
Sigh. I KNEW there would be someone like you showing up, anon.
What did I tell you about the difference between art and literature? Yours is a literary analysis.
The world of art critics and art historians is filled with people like you. English majors who wandered into the wrong class.
Again: Hold out your hands as though carrying something. Look at the position of your thumbs. Look at the fingers. Now tell me if Shep got it right.
No, he did not. And do you know why? Because he was tracing clip art of an extended hand as seen from the side, instead of doing actual drawing.
That's what I was talking about. Craft. Talent. Ability. NOT subject matter.
Fuck subject matter. Subject matter is the LEAST important part of any painting.
Think about it: A 7 year old kid scrawls a kid's drawing of the crucifixion. According to shitheads like you, that scrawl is equivalent to the Gruenwald Crucifixion. Hey, why not? The subject matter is the same, and in your eyes, subject matter is all that counts.
And that, my friend, is precisely why this lazy generation refuses to learn how to do what Gruenwald knew how to do. And our culture is much the poorer for that attitude.
FUCK SUBJECT MATTER! Art is not WHAT but HOW.
I owe anon an apology. I should not have used abusive language toward him. Forgive me; the topic is too close to my heart.
Besides, my back really hurts.
Post a Comment