IF YOU'RE A GROTESQUE ARTIST, STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW!!!!!
There are a lot of grotesque artists out there. I feel sorry for them because there's no market for this stuff. At least the over-the-top grotesque artists like the guy who did the picture above can probably get published in punk or alternative magazines. What about the artists who are hybrids: half normal and half grotesque? These unfortunates are doomed. They're not drastic enough to appeal to punks and not normal enough to appeal to a mass audience. If you're one of these caught-in-the-middle types I have a valuable piece of advice for you...stop doing what you're doing! Stop it right now, this minute! Either get more drastic or get more normal! Stay where you are and you'll be eating cereal for dinner for the rest of your life!
I wish I could have illustrated this piece with drawings that are more illustrative of this middle condition. I couldn't bring myself to hold fellow cartoonists up to up to ridicule so I opted to use classic pictures instead, only I had trouble finding them. Thomas Rowlandson is a famous grotesque artist but I couldn't find really good examples of his work. The lame Rowlandson above is the best I could do.
I also tried to find examples of my own inadvertantly grotesque art. Normally my house is cluttered with this stuff but now that I need it I can't find a single drawing. By grotesque I don't mean the extreme Worm poses I've posted so far. They're just exagerrated. Believe me, I have nothing against wild or extreme cartoon drawings. By grotesque I mean drawings that are unintentionally off-putting to the audience, which lack an understanding of the principles of design and therefore have no pleasing elements to balance out the gross parts. Grotesque art of the kind I'm talking about subverts the intent of the artist which was simply to be funny.
Please don't ask me to evaluate your work. I wouldn't presume to do that! All I can offer is advice: if you even suspect that you fall into the category I'm talking about then get a designer friend to redraw some of your questionable drawings so you can see what you might be doing wrong. Pay the person if necessary. You want to keep the guts and humor of the grotesque drawing but use design to make it more appealing. Think of Rod Scribner. He managed to be appealing and drastic at the same time.
Basil Wolverton is often sited as the ultimate grotesque artist. I don't see him in that light. He knew how to use design to make the gross elements more palitable. In the drawing above he balances out the grotesque face with straight, ordered hair. He lets plenty of airspace into the face which softens it. The drastic face is integrated with the whole, sedate grey and red graphic surrounding it.
16 comments:
Eddie, do caricatures sit in this category? I was just wondering because most caricatures are only slightly exaggerated and just look a little grotesque in order to still retain recognition of the subject. It seems to be the case that this particular skill needs a little restraint in order to be successful.
Or are caricatures a totally different kettle of fish?
I have been called a "grotesque artist" in the past, but I believe it had more to do with my personal hygene than anything.
Maybe R. Crumb falls inbetween the lines Eddie.. Whats your opinion on Crumb?
Gary Panter cornered the market in 1980 on 'punk' and 'edge' in commercial drawings. The doors really swung open for him once Pee Wee Herman arrived. But Panter came along at exactly the right moment, in precisely the right venue. We were too early and not working for a crowd that exactly had our backs.
That lady has my smile! Gee whiz!
Yes, grotesque art intergrated into simple design works and makes it it pretty in a way.
I can't really understand what you mean without any examples. I understand why you don't want to post something that would embarrass someone but isn't there someone within the last 50 years who's dead that you could use? Poor Rowlandson--he was working in a style common 200+ years ago.
maybe you could draw a pastiche yourself of what you mean--then itd be safe from hurting anyone's feelings.
It seems to me you might mean people who are inadverently grotesque by virtue of not being good draughstmen--is that right? because there are hundreds of artists who are making a pretty good go of grotesquerie in the pages of Juxtapoz and in many expensive galleries these days...but perhaps they fall into your category of acceptable ugliness, like Wolverton?
well, dammit, I don't do it on purpose (most of the times).
Would you consider Ed "Big Daddy" Roth's art grotesque?
I love to draw all different types of cartoon characters, but the ones that I sell the most of are the ugly/Rat Fink style characters that I draw (for some reason, nobody seems to give a crap about my cute characters). If I had my own way, I'd draw like Scribner and Tex Avery all the time, but my niche is the rockabilly/hot-rod/tiki scene, and now I've got more business than I even have time for. I had a booth at the Rat Fink Party in Palmdale last weekend, and my comics sold like hot cakes. People who drive crazy cars LOVE to spend money on ugly cartoon characters with warts, drool, pimples, wrinkles, rotting teeth, and big vainy eyes.
But, even when the characters themselves are "grotesque", you should still have a good sense of artistic design when you draw.
Great post Eddie
Historical note: The sedate grey with the red graphic elements for the MAD comic book cover is a parody of LIFE magazine's cover layout style of the 50s. I guess the joke was meant to make the veiwer believe for a split second that they were looking at an actual LIFE magazine cover when displayed on the magazine rack.
Everybody: I probably came off as pretty arrogant in this post. I meant to argue from the position of someone who has grotesque tendensies himself and therefore has a sympathetic understanding of the problem.
Just for the record, I love outrageous drawings. I feel sorry for artists who play it safe all the time. If you take risks you'll occassionaly cross the line and gross people out. That's to be expected and is nothing to be ashamed of. What I was criticizing here is art that crosses the line when the artist doesn't intend it.
If you feel that an unintented ugliness is creeping into your art, something that puts you off even in the act of drawing, then you're the person I wrote this post for.
Ryan: Crumb was occassionally grotesque and off-putting but so what? In his prime he was probably the greatest artist of his time.
Anonymous, Forbes: I can't define grotesque but most of us know it when we see it. If you don't know what I mean or wether it applies to your work then you're probably free of this condition and don't have to worry about it. The people I'm talking about know they have the problem, they're just in denial about it.
Shawn: It sounds like you're doing fine!
Brian: I looked up Jim Phillips on your site. The man is a formidable skateboard artist!
Rddie
Thanks for the reply Eddie!
I think this may tie in with the subject of this post.
Over a month ago, a friend of mine had a baby boy. To congratulate him, I drew a picture of him with his newborn son and posted it on my blog here.
I thought it was a nice gesture myself but, as you can see from the comments, someone got creeped out by it. Unfortunately, that person never explained why. Oh well, I guess "grotesque" is in the eye of the beholder. ;)
Well, I've abandoned my search for a grotesque fairy tale illustration that scarred me for life: a depiction of Froggie (the amphibian dandy who purportedly would a-wooing go), as a man with an emormous frog head, with human hands and legs. It always gave me the creeps, the same way William Wegman's Cinderella contained photos of Weimeraners wearing witch costumes, but with human hands sticking out the sleeves. THOSE are grotesque. (The images, not the Weimeraners, though they're not so hot either.)
I suspect that many of our "grotesque artists" are actually just not very good at drawing or have had no legitimate training in basic anatomy, composition, etc., whereas somebody like Drew Friedman has obviously been practicing.
Looking at the picture David posted, I can see what would 'creep' out somebody. (Mind you, I can barely draw a stick figure, so take this with a grain of salt.)
I believe it is the combination of large eyebrow ridges, small eyes, and a somewhat large gap between the nose and the upper lip on the baby's face. These elements are normally used to depict simian characteristics. Now this is offset by the large cheeks and head shape, but I imagine some people might glance at the picture, fixate on those elements, and be unsettled.
Post a Comment