HOME | DD
LiamRSharp — More on Haters
Published: 2014-01-10 20:25:13 +0000 UTC; Views: 5309; Favourites: 20; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
body div#devskin0 hr { }
This is a copy and paste from my facebook page, but I felt it was really important to say something, and equally valid here:
'I HATE that trashy Image style. Hiding bad drawing with flashy technique….'
Oh boy. I'm so tired of hearing this.
The internet nearly broke yesterday with a battle (on FaceBook) around good drawing, bad drawing, technique, bad manners, being able to take criticism or not, and whether a certain artist did or didn't deserve his success, and why we hate him, or not. It was epic.
I'm not going to go into the details. It got out of hand. My toes curled when I read all the comments. My heart sank. The entire original point of the thread was buried under a mound of vitriol which, justified or not, made me a little ashamed of my industry.
Comics are not all about good drawing. I've seen plenty of Jack Kirby anatomy that aligns to reality only in the most rudimentary sense, but we all know he was great.
The so-called Image style actually evolved at Marvel - and if you were around at the time you would have seen that all the guys progressing that style produced books that were the most interesting, dynamic and well-drawn (not that that matters) of the mainstream.
The guys that sparked this artistic revolution were brilliant stylists. Arthur Adams was one of the first to utilize hatching in such a bold way, playing with the way figures were drawn, and how best to show powers graphically. He inspired a legion of artists to try and do what he was doing (I remember J. Scott Campbell very humbly saying in an interview once "I'm not a Jim Lee clone! I'm an Art Adams clone!"
But it wasn't just Arthur, it was Barry Windsor-Smith, with his amazing detailed and symbolic work on stories like 'Red Nails' that informed this new approach. We had grown up being blown away by that work and wanted to try it. It was also the pioneering work done by Scott Williams on the inks, who himself inspired a generation of inkers. And there had also been inspiration in the tight, increasingly stylized work of John Byrne and Terry Austin (who's Starlord story with Chris Claremont remains a high water mark in my collection.)
Jim Lee and Marc Silvestri were the two guys that really inspired me the most during the time I was working on Marvel UK's Death's Head II. Paul Neary, the editor in chief, had introduced me to their work and wanted our Marvel UK work to share the house technique, and these guys blew my mind. Their XMen work, before the shiny paper and Image days, even before Photoshop coloring, was just stunning. It possessed great energy, bold layouts and a real underlying ability that I found utterly irresistible. But even the work of the much-vilified Rob Liefield oozed charisma and vigor. He dared to put the impetus of the story before continuity, and anything else. I could see the appeal, and put it in a similar category to Todd McFarlane's work of that time - who's Hulk run inked by Bob Wiacek I absolutely adored.
(As an aside - regarding continuity, Simon Bisley made a virtue of not giving a damn about that in his seminal ABC Warriors work, and we all applauded him for it. Rules are made for breaking!)
The so-called 'Image style' revitalized the mainstream. It brought me back to US superhero comics, which I had given up on to a very large extent. It inspired me. It excited me. It was bloody good stuff!!! Out of this style came me, Travis Charest, the late Michael Turner, Finch, Capullo, and many others who went on to great things.
When the books went glossy, and the color got shiny and lens-flare-happy it was, to be fair, a step away from the genuine class that preceded. But these were changing times, and there are always birthing pains. At times it did seem that the stylistic excesses overwhelmed the drawing - but make no mistake: it is NOT easy to do! And when a style so dominates where else do you go? If not MORE, then what?
Too often this amazing time is painted as vulgar and over-blown. The artistry is dismissed, the creators seen as second-rate and sometimes deserving of mass ridicule. I think it can get incredibly personal in ways it never could, nor ever should, in the past. Once the worst we got was a stinging letter in a letter column - and that could cause mass alcohol consumption and self doubt for a stretch of time all by itself!
Comics CAN be great art by incredible artists - the world's best in my opinion. But they can also just be bubblegum entertainment for people who just want to escape the world for half an hour and be transported somewhere magical. To judge all comics with the same expectation is futile and pointless. To mock or bully people who's art you have personally decided is sub par seems mean-spirited. That they may not be paragons of virtue themselves does not negate our own behavior.
We should be better than that. We should be an example.
That's just what I think. You may, of course, beg to differ.
Related content
Comments: 42
I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of your statements, Liam. I personally choose to be polite and respectful in all my online exchanges, I find that it's become far too easy and acceptable to spew hostility and condemnations at other people for even the most harmless slight or disagreement-- especially online.
Millions hide behind anonymous online identities and attack others from a place of safety; never having to worry about becoming the target of a similar attack. I find it cowardly and immature.
As it relates to comics consumers, there is a lot of narrow-mindedness and cruelty in comics fandom. I personally don't care to engage in much of the debate about "who is a better artist than whom," or "who is more deserving of the prestige they've achieved" and so forth.
But I think that if an individual creator is willing to accept the praise and adulation from fans, they must also be prepared to accept the hostility and condemnation from fans. They are both facets of the same dynamic, which is in essence, people evaluating work based on their own tastes and experiences; it's entirely subjective.
I'm not at all comfortable with the idea that we should only express thoughts and opinions that serve the ego of the creator and withhold those thoughts and ideas that do not. That seems inherently subservient-- why should anyones values and opinions be filtered to serve the emotional welfare of comics creators?
I've personally had my work subjected to the harshest critiques and I yet I must accept those criticisms, whether qualified or otherwise, if I choose to place my work in the public eye. While I would much prefer that all feedback was constructive, curiously, I'm less preoccupied with constructive feedback when presented with lavish praise. *lol*
So while I've stewed and bristled over attacks on my art by anonymous viewers of my work-- I invited this behavior simply by sharing the work. I "deserve" the harsh critiques as much as I "deserve" the praise. But to be honest, these days my work is met with such indifference that I'd almost welcome a good healthy reaming. *lol*
As it relates to artists and writers protecting their feelings, I've seen some creators build curated message boards where their hand-picked moderators ban or censor anything that may potentially upset the aforementioned creator. While I don't begrudge anyone their choices, I find that to exist in a bubble of this nature distances us from reality and professional growth.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
Extremely well put, and I have to agree. But what I'm talking about was not critique or deconstruction or even subjective dislike. It was venom and vitriol. It was bullying. It was mean.
I never expect anybody to like my work. I've ALWAYS split opinion. (Like most artists, I generally dislike my own work so I'm on the side of the critics!) But haters? I have no time for that.
Cheers for the excellent response. Appreciated!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm VERY glad you said this, Liam. I grew up reading comics in the early 90s, and I still have alot of affinity for those old comics. People often forget how much those comics were a product of their time, and how the whole Gen X scene influenced everything from the storytelling of those comics to the very artwork itself. I still love Jim Lee (and his staying power has only been proven in the successive years since '92).
And yes, I even love Rob Liefeld's old work, with all of its warts and flaws. Yes, he made some pretty dumb business decisions (he didn't have the business sense of McFarlane or Lee), and some of his past behavior could be considered petty....but I will forever defend Liefeld if only for one simple thing: His work, and the work of the Image guys in general, saved American comics from disappearing completely up its own asshole. It served as an effective counterweight to the artsy, cerebral comics like Sandman and The Invisibles (whose creator, Grant Morrison, is a fan of Liefeld's work). Their work - and Liefeld's in particular - served the tastes of children at the time and managed to keep comics fun.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
People need to remember that just like beauty, art is in the eye of the beholder, so all the haters and elitists being offensively opinionated and bigoted on Facebook should remember their own perceptions are not golden universal truth.
While not a comic book reader per se I certainly admired most of the art I saw in the comic strips and the odd comic book I've come across. While not all art styles inspire me to try to do something in that vein, I still appreciate different types.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
sent you a note. Saw the journal. *Hands Liam the pimps golden glove* He gonna marcus fenix some ppl.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i became an artist myself because of all the Image creators. I started following them and their work a few years before image and i'm still speechless when thinking about the Image Revolution because when can you experience all your favorite artists banding together and start their own company!?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The goal of comics was very different back then and that's hard to understand these days. Today people take a lot of things for granted, but most pros understand we wouldn't be here in terms of production quality and creators rights if It wasn't for Image and everything that happened back in the 90's. Like they say, Jim Lee might not be your favorite artist, but there's a good chance It's your favorite artist's favorite artist.
I reread some early WildCats recently and I still marvel at how those guys were 8 or 10 years ahead of their time. I really wish there was a third alternative in superhero comics these days. Someone who does 21st century superheroes, rather than recycling 70yr old ones. Valiant is doing fine, but to me they lack the edge Wildstorm had at some point. I miss Wildstorm a lot.
Man, I could rant about this for hours. It drives me nuts.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
amen. Thank you for speaking up about the incredible time of current comics and art, and calling out the terrible and easy hatred people seem to spew out constantly. People often forget that the icons and nicknames they are speaking to are real people with real emotion and merely human like themselves. Its akin to the road rage syndrome - people curse and complain at the drivers around them, without a thought toward the humanity and failability and mental states of strangers. (Has anyone ever cursed at a driver only to discover later that it was a friend or relative driving that car, and then felt a little guilty for getting so pissed? Yeah.) I try to view the strangers in my physical and internet space as respectable human beings that could easily be my relatives or friends.
And for those that dish out complaints, would they say the same things if they personally knew the creators? There is a reason we try to be civil toward those we care about. So why are so many people un-civil towards strangers or even acquaintances?
ALSO: there is so much in this world right now to love. There is probably an art style for every cell in the body. So why spend so much time hating (different from critiquing) on a style when people could be spending that time seeking out or (gasp) creating a style they love?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well put, and I totally agree.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I always LIKED the Image period. Yes it was stylized but that style brought in a dynamic way of thinking about the universe the characters inhabited. Now the effects could allow for the conveyance of emotional states and intensities that were previously impossible or too extreme to be done.
Shit, my biggest influence from those days was Dale Keown back when he was penciling for THE INCREDIBLE HULK and then PITT. You wanna talk about LEIFIELD's plastic rendition of reality, HOLY SHIT, Keown was a sinew-and-spittle surrealist that made Leifield look like a classicist by comparison. But DAMN did his work make you (or at least ME) wanna buy the comic and see what to expect. And truth be told, his type of intense linework and off-kilter composition was perfect for the type of cinematic storytelling that Peter David was doing for the book back then. I think in some way it was what drove me more to hyperrealism because I saw that it was possible to be extremely detailed and accurate but also dramatic and pliable at the same time.
If anything, you could argue that the worst thing about Image was the uneven quality writing-and-concept execution that tended to occur (PITT being a good example) but that's an overall creative problem that everyone deals with, not just Image. The best creators and artists stumble, but just because they tend to share a talent pool doesn't mean the singular aesthetic is the problem.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
very well written, and also very true.
I remember collecting alot of comics arounf the "Image days", also before hand on X-men, i still love the art from that era. I still try and collect collections of comics/storylines from that era.
Alot of ppl hate the 90's comics because everything was "overdone". Without these artists like Jim, Marc, Todd, Rob etc, comics would not be the way they are today.
Very good point you make. I also cringe when I see comments on forums etc bagging out these artists.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I have a big problem in my college with that, either you are within illustration and comics or you're mocked because you are. Many teachers and students despise this world which is the one I mostly love so for all the concept artists/illustrators and so on it's quite hard for us to fight the world of plastic arts or go along with it, either way we are either contradicting mostly our work or falling against everyone. I don't understand why most ppl don't get that I can be a painter and an illustrator but it is who I am and hate won't get us anywhere. We should simply trade opinions and if we're not good at something we don't need to minimalize it or despise it. It's just a different way of seeing. I wish most ppl there would get that
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Personally, I loved the Image comics when they first came out. They were refreshing, different, and raised the bar for DC and Marvel. I remember picking up the first issue of Spawn and just staring at it in awe.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Keep in mind that the ones doing the most criticizing generally lack the experience in what they are talking about or they have, as one mentioned "an ego as big as outdoors". Also art is subjective. I saw a picture once of a statue that my company bought for one of its new buildings and I was shocked at how much they spent on it. It looked like a series of glass balloon flowers. The price was in the millions. I thought "There's nothing special about that" and there probably could have been a dozen more skilled pieces they could have purchased for less but that's what they wanted.
These people who seem to be unable to participate in any sort of meaningful debate let alone mutual respect do not really matter in the long run. In fact, they are small and petty. Take the remarks with a grain of salt and keep in mind that they are not judges of the artistic world. No one is.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
that's what's horrible about the internet. people can post and say whatever they want and most of it is just thoughtless hate-speak. poop on them i say
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I believe once you reach that "superstar" status, it inflates the ego by quite a fair bit? (I imagine). I've been there thinking I was "the sh$#" when I felt big progress in the begining. I taught myself to just focus on what drawing means to me: happiness. And it is true. I draw because it makes me happy. It amazes me how people can stay grounded into reality and keep their soul in this business. I've watched that time lapse of you working with Bill Sienkiewicz and Ben Wolstenholme at the MadeFire Studios, and I can tell that there's friendship and mutual respect in watching you guys work. It was amazing just to watch people create in a "pro" setting, and the camaraderie between you fine artists.
Watching you work made me remember about Jim Lee interviews, and how humble and modest he is. Maybe money or fame doesn't get to everyone's heads. And in the eyes of rookies like me this means role models to follow and admire. Keep up the amazing work you guys do at MadeFire.
Maybe some day when I'm good enough I might join you and see the masters at work, it would mean a dream come true. So more hard work it is for me!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I 'm sure that some of these artists who are accused of doing "bad" drawings can actually draw really well, they just choose not to because their "bad" style is more popular and sells better.
If these artists suddenly changed their style to be more anatomically correct then even more people would complain that their comics were ruined.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Usually I stay out of discussions on the web simply because its hard to have meaningful conversations. I often fell into the assumption that most if not all commenters involved were there for a thoughtful discussion and, failing to persuade the other party to the others opinion or point, would eventually agree to disagree. At the very least we should be able to see that there are others that see things differently. More often than not the boards are patrolled, loitered, or staffed with people who either want to get the ire of others up, or after failing to be proven a verbal factual god decide its better to attack than truly share. Sad, though, because the people we could truly learn from eventually stop sharing because its not worth the energy to keep those deflectors that keep us from being annoyed by insincere posters up.
Don't get too disheartened through the muck there are still board members that there to truly think, share, and learn.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I was a fan of the original Image creators back in the day. Back then I just liked flashy pages with energetic poses and fight scenes and sexy women. As I matured and learned more about story telling and technique and other details of comic art that many in the industry were passing over in favor of the big splash page and the gritted teeth and big boobs. Maybe I became a bit of an art snob, but I started to really dislike some artists who I used to admire. Over the years, I may have even developed some animosity towards artist that I felt I could do better than who were getting jobs and I was not. But I also know that had a lot to do with my not really getting myself out there. I was involved in the thread you are referring to. I do think many people on there used the discussion as a means to air their dislike in a way that was not constructive at all and went beyond what the original post was getting at, not that someone's style or skill is necessarily bad, but that there was a very big mistake and flaw in a piece from someone who should at this point know better and who has demonstrated those same mistakes many times. I loved your early work on the Death's Head 2 books, and I figured that many companies actually insisted that artists emulate the style of artists like Rob Liefeld and Jim Lee and Marc Silvestri because that was what was popular. That style, like or hate it, was seen as a needed shot in the arm for comics. A bold, expressive and unique way of telling a story. But in time, the importance was put so much on drawing like someone that whether or not the art was anatomically right or correct in other ways was unimportant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I myself have lost a lot of artistic drive in recent years over this ire towards stylized "90s" art that seems to rule the majority of comic book enthusiasts.
And it's not just art, entertainment in general seems to be overly scrutinized to the point that I have a hard time enjoying anything. And it seems like that it's not only become socially acceptable to intellectually bully people for liking something, but to also bully people for not liking something.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Being that I am a big fan of Jack Kirby and Richard Corben, I have no problem at all with things not being true to life.
I've seen every style since the EC era to the stuff that came out this week and it's all good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I have nothing but fond memories of the so-called "Image Era"... The studies and improvements in techniques and the quality of the books being put out leapt forward at a time when there wasn't a lot of quality to speak of among the ranks of "classic" comics. You can find the bad or good in any cultural movement if you stare long enough. Anyone who tries to claim that nothing good came out of Homage, Wildstorm, Cliffhanger, Malibu, Chaos and even Extreme an their like doesn't have a true appreciation of the decade.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't beg to differ. I agree whole-heartedly. The 'Image Style' got me back into comics after a long period of apathy. Good on them. It made me want to draw and personally that's the biggest compliment I can give.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I can't argue with any of what you say here, but at the same time it will never make me enjoy that particular school of thought as much as I enjoy really strongly interpretive styles. I have a firm belief that the "image" style is really strong and works really well in it's place, but I just don't enjoy reading a Jim lee book the way I enjoy reading a Templesmith book, that hyperrealistic style (for me at least) gets in the way with connecting with the atmosphere of the narrative.
But I'd never, ever, want comics to just be one thing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i often get that people hate my realistic style (i admit, i still need a LOT of practice in that department), but love my cartoony, sometimes almost disney-esque style even though i don't find it interesting (though i draw it most of the time if i want a quick sketch or to stimulate my brains).
art in my perspective, no mather what medium, is something the creator decides. you adjust your style according to the serie you're working on, but its still yours to experiment with and to make it evolve, no mather what the trolls or the douches say. i often think that in every criticsm or bashing, there's a truth hidden and it's our task to search for it and decide if we use it or not.
art is something its creator owns and if the "fans" dismiss it as second-rate and keep on bashing it like trolls, then to hell with them! if they are true fans in my opinion, then they should give the best criticsm they've got and help the artist they love.
to me, my current guiding lights amongst artists would be Stjepan Šejić, Dan Luvisi, Allison Smith, Stanley Lau and you (with that i mean your art for Outcast and I Frankenstein XD), but Stjepan in particulair. the man knows how to make art! sometimes highly detailed and painted, sometimes simple and slightly sloppy (you could call it conceptart-ish). i had the most incredible luck that i had the chance to meet him last year.
No matter what people say, there will always be people, may they be artists or fans, you guys will always inspire people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well said, matey. Sorry to hear about your misfortunes, Liam.
It's always a funny thing with critics, particularly how to respond to them. Too humble and they walk all over you. Give them "I don't give dang" response and they think you're disrespecting the fans as a whole. Be silent and you prove them right or let them get away with it. Justify yourself in the wrong way and you justify someone who really is horrible. And so on and so forth, and it's always a tricky scenario in attempting to calm them down. It's tricky to write this comment and choose my words carefully too.
For someone who has a dayjob with a semi-regular habit of dealing with thieves and horrible people, I'll say this. Just because someone "pays my wages" neither means they can treat me like a slave nor does it mean they own me. In the case of comics, I think the eternal appeal in them is that you don't "own" the material as such and that you are tuning in for every edition of the work for the excitement in the random chaos that unfolds. There might be purist rules in places, but expecting these rules to be both eternal law and above the changing times, particularly in the creative media, it's like a Bazooka shot in the foot I would say.
To be fair, one's own inner critic has a habit of "conspiring" if you will with external criticism. What I mean is the more an art critic expects you to be critical of yourself, sooner or later the more critical you feel you are to said critic and other people, because you expect them to set an example too. One doesn't rush to go on the offensive of course, because I realize the art critic had to break a couple of eggs and screw up a few breakfasts before he or she got an omelette out of it too. But whilst there are egotistical artists out there who aren't particular nice people outside of their work and don't deserve support, the point is there are people out there who are just heartless savages out to get everyone. I think if these people are forcing themselves onto false pedestals from positions of ignorance, inexperience or even immorality, and think they can get away with in compassionately discriminate others at will, then they are neither better that what they're "fighting against" nor are they good role models. And that's generally what I see in people who are just in the scene to nag. If they insist every artist has to be just like Artist X then they're already dooming themselves and others around them.
I had this bloke once about a decade ago who bemoaned how i couldn't write or draw worth a damn. Said guy also vilified practically everyone else, had a ego bolstered by sheep too afraid to say nay, was very rarely helpful to anyone, and boasted how 98% of things in life weren't worth bothering with. I can't say I trust a person with those odds in an outlook!
But yeah, as you can see I've been thinking about this one for a bit. At least you Liam gave this Journal a solid half an hour of thought, compared to the other people who just gave 10 seconds of hissing disapproval at their monitors (and maybe another 3 minutes of wiping the angry froth off their gobs). You strike me as a big chap ready to keep climbing up that mountain, but don't let 'em get you down, mate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There is no right or wrong way to do art. That's sort of the point to art. Each person has their own style or way of doing things. Anyone who has an issue with that does not appreciate art at all. So what if the anatomy of a drawing is not photo spot on. It's that artist's interpretation of the human form and just the way they draw it. That's what makes each artist special. When you can look at a piece and know which artist drew it just by the way the figure is drawn. or know who colored it by the tones of the pallet. That's why I love comic books. I was always happy that I could tell which artist penciled that issue just by looking at it. It doesn't matter how detailed or simplistic the art style is. It's all art, and it's all special. And Facebook is just full of drama any way lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I found this especially fascinating to see today, as I've been having my own issues recently with a similar themed criticism of my own work by others. I don't post my work on deviant anymore, but I do have another site. Being self taught and doing things my own way, I've received both praise from other artists and criticism from within my own family that I'm not doing things in a traditional manner. It's hard to keep going sometimes in your own style with so many mixed messages. I think a valuable example is Dr. Seuss, as he was turned down by publishers who said his work was terrible, and now he's the best selling author/artist of children's books ever. And JK Rowling was also turned down by publishers for her Harry Potter series; bet those publishers are hitting their heads against a wall with that decision! There will always be critics; it's what you have in your heart, mind, soul that you present to the best of your ability that matters. You never know if you might end up the next Dr. Seuss or JK Rowling, etc!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think is a stigmata all artforms share. The same happens with music, movies, books, etc. Its a matter of growing past our selfish self (is that right?) and be better persons as you say. Be open to learn and be thaught, sometimes it's not the same. Great essay.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
