How will history remember our art?

[Bammer]

Yesterday I bought Ashley Wood's D'Airain 1 and Zombies vs. Robots 2. I remarked to my friend that I thought Ashley Wood, while not be appreciated enough in his time, will surely go down as something absolutly amazing and under-appreciated in comic book art history.

And he said he felt that he and Jon Fosfter and and James Jean and others would definitly be hailed beyond their years. I disagreed with him about James Jean and we had a heated arguement the rest of the way home.

But it got me thinking. Who within the conceptart.org and related art subcultures will go down in the illustration student textbook. Which ones will the futures artist forget. Will Craig Mullins be considered one of the Old Masters? Will my first additions of Ashley Wood comics make my grandchildren rich?

Discuss.

[evidence]

i have to say i love ashley wood, i own a lot of his books and im always checking out what hes currently doing, but i feel like its mostly style, not a lot of substance. thats why im really confused why you think james jean wouldnt be on that list?

[Rabid]

After my masters degree, if I end up in a University setting I will draw up a teaching plan for concept design because I feel that cocnept design is a class within itself (pre req drawing classes and 3d fundementals of course :))....ten guesses which web site and artists we will look to? ;)

[Djohnston]

I think James Jean and Ashley Wood are getting a lot of recognition now (deservedly), I don't know what makes you think Wood is underrated? He's extremely popular and does very well for himself.

[paperX]

I dont understand why you disagreed with your friend as james jean's paintings are nothing short of amazing.

however, i do have to say...these guys aren't even that old yet...imagine how great they would really be a couple more years down the line....I'm sure CA will go down in history tho :yayca:

[sciboy]

Who ever said history would ever remember anything that wasn't controversial?

[Ilaekae]

You cannot predict history under any circumstances. You can guess...but you can't predict.

What you see now is meaningless in the eyes of those who haven't been born yet, and it's their children who will write the books about us. Even then, their "history" will be distorted because we are, and have been for at least 50 years, in an era that can produce any fact it wants, determine its accuracy and promote it as the truth. Read any political history of the last fifty years and you'll see what I mean.

One thing that will be likely is that anything supported strongly by the masses today will be relegated to the sidelines tomorrow by serious students of history because they will recognize the manipulation that has gone on (because they themselves may be doing the same thing) and attempt to correct for it.

Apply this to art as best you can, and you will be on the right track...

[DavePalumbo]

I do sometimes think about that, what half dozen or so artists of our generation will really leave a mark that people outside the illustration community will remember? When it comes to the ones that really last, we'll never be as big as the monuments that came before us.

and I wouldn't rule out James Jean, he's exploding like crazy and not even 30 yet.

[Act.Appalled]

This is definitely an interesting topic.
Overall on the day to day, how many people that do not do artwork know of or have even heard of, Craig Mullins, Scott Robertson, Marko D, Andrew Jones, Puddnhead...
(just ask a friend that doesnt know anything about CA who Puddnhead is...)

Few to none...I have no doubts within the conceptual art community that they will all probably become legends, most already are considered "rock stars" within CA. But to the popular community? Probably not.

Some people think it takes one person to make a video game, or have no idea how it gets made, it just falls from the sky.

However Frank Frazetta, theres a Master!

[Justin.]

Phil Hale anyone?



Also, I agree with the above. If I mention any of those names to anybody, it means nothing. Puddn'head is probably one of the more well known because of MTG, Ryan Church because of Star Wars, Feng Zhu as well. Mullins is known more for Marathon than for Halo I suspect, suprisingly few people know about him. I wonder how famous the WoW artists are?

Also, what about 3d artists and texture artists? And animators? I think that's a problem though, that digital art, in the public eye anyways- will always seem 'easy' or 'the computer does it for them'. Although we all know different... most of the public never will.

But I think art has taken a back seat recently. At my old school, an ARTS school, while there were very large expensive theatre productions every few weeks, we never had "Student Exhibitions" or any galleries or anything. They didn't support us like that at all. One teacher tried to do it with the seniors, but only half of the artists even showed up, and there were very few people. Turned out to be a big waste of money, and so they never did it again. Even my current school, a normal average public school, we have all these "battle of the bands" and "Tigerfest (Local music concert)" and things, but no student work hangs on the walls, there are no exhibitions or displays or anything. The only local galleries interested in sponsoring students all are artsy-fartsy and "Conceptual", they perfer the 'scene' kids with concepts over still lives in oil/charcoal.

[Elwell]

If the Salons in Paris went down in history, I'm sure CA will someday go down in History.
Baaaaaaaad analogy.

I was going to write a long post, but, as usual, Ilaekae said everything better than i could already.

[Act.Appalled]

Also, what about 3d artists and texture artists? And animators? I think that's a problem though, that digital art, in the public eye anyways- will always seem 'easy' or 'the computer does it for them'. Although we all know different... most of the public never will.


Funny story, I had a General Ed (Renaissance Art History) class and for an assignment we had to do a couple Master Copies. One of the studies I did was a digital painting, and the class got into a big discussion because someone asked, "so you just hit a button and it printed it out right?"

Eventually I broke down and told them I used the Craig Mullins button in PS. My friends in the class got a laugh. :dead:


And even some of my friends who play a ton of video games, don't know who the hell any of the artists are...

[Justin.]

True... just got home from work, to tired to think.

But that's a poor excuse too.

[Seedling]

I don’t care what the next generations will think of my art. They get to pick their own forms of entertainment and make their own art to suit their tastes. In fact, I rather hope they don’t like today’s art, because that will mean more jobs for tomorrow’s artists. My audience is the folk who are alive and interested in my work right now, because I take pleasure in seeing their reaction to what I make. I couldn’t subsist on the idea that someone might possibly like my art after I’m gone

[Sepulverture]

I highly doubt anyone will ever remember my art, but you know what? That won't keep me from trying. I think that the art that does get remembered from (lets say) the concept art community as a whole will be thought of the same way we think of classic 40's - 60's horror and sci-fi monsters. Back then that shit was scary and sheer genius to a lot of people I'm sure, now it's just cheesy to a lot of people, but one can still draw inspiration from it. I think that 50 years from now, a new generation of artists will look back on our work and think that very thing.

[Idiot Apathy]

I wish that bammer guy would post some more work, he's loosing his grip on being remembered in the future! *pokes you in the eye* pwease?

[wassermelone]

I think theres also a lot of leeway in how people are approaching the topic of "go down in history".

I would think that if you were talking about general history... no, James Jean would probably not be in the books. Even greats such as Charles Dana Gibson are generally left out of general history books despite their IMMENSE popularity at the time. On the other hand, Norman Rockwell is well solidified as a historical figure.

If the general history of art is whats being discussed, no, James Jean will probably not be there unless something pretty different happens in the mindset of art historians as to the significance of illustration or even traditional objective painting/art in general.

The history of Illustration however... yeah, I think James Jean will probably be on the list. Who knows what weight will be given to him, but I think he would certainly be there.

[Justin.]

Well, Rockwell had his stuff printed on the cover of 300 some of an incredibly popular Magazine (Or whatever you'd call the Post... a periodical?), and despite some really nice work, it is often called Kitsch.

Like, take C.F. Payne- he paints the back covers of Reader's Digest. He has some really cool stuff, caricturish but he can really get across a story well. I think Rockwell was symbolic OF the SNPost, and the SNPost was symbolic of Rockwell. It wasn't because he was a GRAND MASTER, it was because EVERYONE saw his stuff somehow or other, and it stayed within the fairly conservative value set that the majority of America seem(ed) to have. A mag or periodical with a nationwide audience would probably want something that satisfies their moral convictions. Look at Marko- if he keeps going on with Marvel like he is, and improving like he is (Have you seen his new batch of work?) I don't think it is unlikely that he will be one of those household comic book names. Aaaaaaaaand I forgot where this gravy train was going. So I'm going to stop here.

[asoir]

i just see it as: you're good and you get lucky

[Hyskoa]

Pretty much the way we look back at the cavemen really.

OMGAWZ they STILL used oil and canvaz or tried to fake it with their overgrown toasters called computers... no wonder they were called primitives. *insert bloated croaking noise depicting laughter*

[ColdKodiak]

so long as you belong to industry that is for profit based, and not part of any rich aristicratic society, then none of us or anyone we know we know will ever be famous like 'aritists' have become famous.

Note that the excessive amounts of money pumped into hollywood hasn't made any of the actual artists become main stream names.

Actors, and Directors take all the credit. The highest paid man wins all the credit and fame.

It's all the same in comics and games, and all these creative industries.
So no, unless these guys start getting paid millions to do comic art or game art... they'll be nothing more than barely-more-well known-people among part a small society of people barely known to anyone outside of it.



Try asking any shmo on the street if the know Feng Zhu, Ryan Church, or Syd Mead (who has been around and been 'famous' a lot longer than any of these other guys). Highly unlikely you'll find someone that has.

[Bammer]

It's true. Even the best non-fine artists rarely get mainstream recognition.

But even in nitch circles, sometimes names live on and sometimes they don't. For example, even if I'm not a personal fan of their art, I know and respect who Luis Royo, Frank Frazetta, and H.R. Geiger are. Now, I have no doubt that Luis Royo was not the only guy to do what Luis Royo did/does, but he's the one that got remembered for it (at least for a little while.) I think, on conceptart.org a body of art has emerged not unlike the kind of scene that emerged when Luis Royo did his thing with heavy metal. He has come to represent that scene. The illustration student in 2030 really only needs one or two token artists to represent this scene we've got workin here.
Will it be Andrew? Will it be Jason? It's got to be somebody.

It also makes me wonder. What if absolutly brilliant artists like Wes Burt are forgotten. Does that mean that many Wes Burts have existed throughout history and have been forgotten? And I'm totally missing out?

Also Ilaekae, I don't think history is as sinister as all that. History repeats itself and we can see the past, so if we apply our noggins i think we have at least a loose grasp of what the future holds.

[Mr Man]

I think I would just like to be remembered in the artist community (gotta get there first though). Not many people of the general public know about the top artists of our world today let alone the sub catagory of concept artists.
Its sort of like music or sport, you really only know what you like or what your exposed to..well sort of but you get the idea.

I hope some of the greats will be remembered in tomorrows world. I guess its our job to bring it out in the open eh.

[DavePalumbo]

Rockwell...despite some really nice work, it is often called Kitsch

as I understand it, Rockwell didn't really take his own work any more seriously as "art" than the others of his day did, but this has been slowly changing. He's shown in museums now and people have been showing his paintings much more respect as serious art in recent years, kind of the way that Ilaekae was talking about.

so long as you belong to industry that is for profit based, and not part of any rich aristicratic society, then none of us or anyone we know we know will ever be famous like 'aritists' have become famous.

Wow, major disagreement. Besides the fact that all the art world is profit based, not just illustration, there are too many examples of illustrators who have achieved household name status. The thing is that most of them don't maintain that status, the same as most fine artists who get a name don't maintain that status. For every Picasso and Van Gogh, there are dozens of Waterhouses, Bouguereaus, and, dare I say it, Sargents who the general public adored in their day and are now really only known to artists, enthusiasts, and scholars. And how many contemporaries of fine arts are household names? Practically zero, I'd guess, and those who are tend to be at least half illustrators, like Kinkade for example.

On the other hand, joe average could almost certainly pick a Rockwell from a line-up, and probably has at least a fuzzy notion of who Frank Frazetta is, or HR Gieger, or maybe even Maxfield Parrish. Do they know Donato and John Foster? Not likely, but they probably don't know Francis Bacon or Odd Nerdrum either. The artists of past centuries were the movie stars of their day and were celebrated as such. Artists today have a much more select following, though i do feel that illustration is becoming more accepted as mature and worthwhile art as time moves on, just as comics have slowly and shakily been doing.

[seba_boi]

Got no clue who's gonna be revered in the future nor who's gonna be forgotten, but I think this generation of artists will be remembered as the digital age and the impact of better communication has on multi-cultural artworks... Popularity is a product of publicity, while longevity is a product of artistry... A very lucky few qualify to both categories...

[Sativan]

it all depends on what you define as fame. there are IMO a lot of really marvelous artists from the 'golden age of illustration', and although only Aubrey Beardsley and a select few others are well-known in the 21st century, if you get into the records that we have of that era and really dig around you keep finding inspiring artists whose work was just as good as those who've been better remembered. of course there are probably even more that we'll never know about because their work rotted away in an attic or was burned in a house or destroyed by bombs...
we must remember that even with all our 'information technology' today, digital files are still reliant on electricity and intact computer guts, and paper books are archaelogically speaking quite fragile.

in 2007 there are more people in the world than ever before, and that causes problems but it also means more artists than ever before. I think a discerning individual from the future who is not trapped in some wierd future-modern mindset might start digging up records of ca.org and think
'"wow, amidst all the slothful consumerism of early 21st century america, and in spite of the silliness and pretension still occupying much of the art world, here was a community that nurtured a flowering of raw creativity and dedication to the mastery of their mediums."
this person might even see ca.org as being a contributing factor in the 'golden age of movie and videogame art'. I doubt all our heroes will be household names, but would they really want to be in that category alongside anna nicole smith, britney spears, and donald trump?

I think we are faced with a challenge, to overcame the distractions and overstimulation of our times, to continue this rennaissance of creativity. american culture in general is becoming more and more obese, simple-minded, and geared toward the pursuit of instant gratification. we need a cure, and I think ca.org is part of it.

just my 2 cents

[Mungus]

I don't think current artists will be remembered historically in the classical sense, but more in the "they were the catalysts of change" or "they epitomised the scene" mould...much like Coldplay will be remembered (household name etc) before Danny Elfman, though they are both champions in their field. A lot of it is whose name is getting dropped the most by peers, and the media, whatever sticks the most now will be the reference names for the future.
I'm not even thinking straight, but Simon BISLEY sticks out for some reason....
:)