• GraniteM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Know what I love about Rockwell? The hands. Artists always talk about how hard it is to draw hands. Rockwell, that dude could draw hands, and he knew it. He drew hands in this picture, through the doorway, when there was absolutely no need to, because he could. And if you look at a bunch of his pictures, he doesn’t just draw hands, he draws hands doing complicated things, making complex gestures, gripping fiddly little objects, he draws old people with wrinkled skin and funky joints on their hands… he was goddamn good at drawing hands and he was not shy about showing off his hand-drawing talent.

    People calling him an illustrator and not an artist are just jealous of his hands.

    Edit:

    Hands:

  • agnomeunknown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    When I was in college I had a professor who made the argument that Norman Rockwell’s work was best described as illustration rather than art. I think it was partly due to the realism and the focus on “normal” American life with a lack of interpretation or symbolism. But looking at this now I can’t help but think he was totally wrong. The look on the girl’s face that says “you should see the other guy,” the concerned adults having a conversation in the principal’s office, there is a whole story being told here in a single frame. To say this isn’t art seems crazy to me.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      He ended the Saturday Evening Post because he refused to ignore the civil rights era and was stonchly on the side of desegrigation and equal rights, and the post refused to ‘‘be too political’’ and stop hiring him for covers, and no one bought them without his covers.

    • ScrambledLogic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      And sometimes there are little details that escape notice until seeing one of his paintings several times; I’ve seen this one before and I liked it, but this time I noticed the mother’s little smile, like she’s proud that her daughter stood up for herself, or remembering when she once sat on that bench with a black eye, or maybe she’s just amused at kids being kids. I like it more now, and I can’t imagine why anyone looking at this would say it’s not art.

      • radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        I thought the woman inside was the school secretary. But I noticed the ribbon in the girls hair unfurled, a bit of schmutz on her knees, and the striations of the tiles.

    • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Illustration major here. Art is such an overarching term that it can pretty much be used as an umbrella term for nearly anything and everything. Etymologically speaking, Illustration just means making something clear, to communicate some idea to someone else. The concept was modernized to encompass the use of pictographs, texts, and diagrams as visual aids.

      All forms of illustrations technically can be classified as pieces of art, as the definitions of art vary wildly. I’ve always taken art to be anything that evokes an emotion novel to either the consumer of art or the producer of the art or conveys a novel idea either back at the artist or to the consumer of art, or some mixture of these. The key thing to me is novelty, which evolves and changes based off of sociocultural norms and personal experience. Again, totally my personal opinion, and fine artists in particular would be able to nitpick this idea to death. Conversations I still enjoy when I have the energy.

      Rockwell comes from a very classic Americana age of illustration. Iirc he is at the tail end of the second golden age of illustration (though my knowledge on the history is very rusty). I always preferred the work of his predecessor, JC Leyendecker, and his predecessor, Alfonse Mucha. Purely from a technical standpoint, mind you. The content of their work, to be frank, I find quite banal.

      As per this particular piece, it’s a simple narrative piece, obviously well executed technically in oil. The narrative is classic Rockwell. I think Rockwell has been ruined for me just because his work created a nostalgia for a time that never quite existed in America. Don’t get me wrong , I think Rockwell was a stand up guy, especially for his time period.

      It’s just that his influence over the American Art and Illustration scene eventually ended up resonating with people who aren’t looking to art for anything more than familiarity, not novelty. Essentially, it’s kitsch. Rockwell unintentionally created the ideal white American past that boomers currently are nostalgic for. An ideal that has had negative ramifications for those of us who have to deal with people who vehemently insist that this idyllic Rockwellian world was the great America we should all return to.

      Sorry to make this political, but art, like anything, cannot be divorced from politics. And intentional or not, Rockwell has contributed to American sociopolitical sentiments in profound ways. He practically invented modern Americana. And while it has its charm, I find it exhausting to see it everywhere.

      In it’s worst manifestation, Rockwell’s legacy ultimately resulted in producing Thomas Kinkade, America’s richest, and arguably the world’s most evil painter. People like to say second most, but Hitler was always a Nazi first and foremost. Calling Hitler a painter is like calling Ronald Reagan an actor. Like yes, but maybe that’s not what he should be remembered for?

      Anyways, the conflation between Illustration and other Artistic disciplines, as well as with differentiating between illustration and art, is a topic of discussion I find very intriguing and one rife with controversy, due in no small part to the ambiguity surrounding the definition of art in general.

      • Nexius_Lobster@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        I always preferred the work of his predecessor, JD Leyendecker, and his predecessor, Alfonse Mucha.

        Isn’t it J. C. Leyendecker?

      • QuantumSparkles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        I’ve always felt a similar way about his art and was surprised to see that he actually did a few political paintings, particularly some about segregation. What are your thoughts on those? While I appreciate his effort, the ones I saw didn’t seem to offer anything textually substantial beyond simply illustrating a straightforward scene that was relevant to the moment—but this is based on a fairly cursory glance

        • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Rockwell did make attempts to make political work towards the latter part of his career. The hard part about being an artist/celebrity of any renown is that your audience becomes sort of like your golden fetters. You can’t change the content of your work less you alienate your fans and more worryingly, your patrons. I admire Rockwell to some degree for taking a chance to address civil rights in some of his works, but theres a lot of reasons why ultimately throse pieces fell short. Rockwell’'s audience at the time didn’t want him to step outside of his folksy genre he had pigeonholed himself into. Its the equivalent to “I just wanted to watch my football and drink my beer man, why you’d have to bring up politics. I get enough of that elsewhere.”

          Additionally, in the case of illustration, sometimes your art style just limits the kinds of messages you can say effectively. Rockwell was an illustrator whose style emphasized and romanticized sweet scenes like from a movie. There’s a reason Disney’s artists take so much inspiration from specific artists and illustrators with a certain romantic flair. Take a look at the sickeningly sweet pastel portrayals of the Victorian bourgeoisie from Fragonard, and imagine that style attempting to address political injustices at that time. It just doesn’t work. Not unless you completely overhaul your style and the way you communicate visually can you convey the message effectively.

          Rockwell tried to use his talents to address the civil injustices of his time, but due to the preconceptions he had built up over he years around the kinds of messages that work could convey, he ultimately was unable to convey it as effectively as other artists at the time would be able to.

          It may not be a fair comparison to make, but the works of Barbara Jones-Hogu were far more effective illustrative pieces that conveyed the sociopolitical sentiments of the time, partially because she was not pinned down by the limitations of what her previous works conveyed.

      • agnomeunknown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Really interesting insights, and good point about the nostalgia for a past that never existed. The work of his predecessors is very nice aesthetically, and Mucha’s seems much more like what that professor would have gladly called art. A lot more stylization at least. I’ve always held kincade’s work in disdain because it struck me as the dullest pablum imaginable, but I hadn’t heard he was also evil. The invidious link didn’t work for me (I’m a filthy yt premium user) but I’ll look up more about that for sure.

        • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Yeah. Please keep in mind I mean no shade at Rockwell himself. I just think he had an unintended negative impact on American culture.

          The video in question was part one of a Behind The Bastards Two Parter. Here are the raw links:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFBQMEn_0rw

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2Jx5WDtzts

          Edit: As an aside, if you want to see an artist who I think was equal parts “true artist” and “true illustrator”, I’d look at Edgar Degas.

          • agnomeunknown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Oh cool I’ve been slowly catching up on btb for a while now, I just haven’t made it to that one yet. It’s a great podcast in general so I’ll look forward to getting the dirt on him. I remember Degas from an art appreciation class but I don’t immediately recognize any of the works on the image search.

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I would argue there is a deeper interpretation. That of the girls always told to smile to look better, yet she is obviously desheveled and rough. But finds joy in the chaos that has ensued from her keeping to herself. The background being the stereotypical school of the time and she is there to shake up the system.

    • Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Art is so subjective that ANYTHING can be art. We’ve all seen the joke art that is a blank canvas with a spot in the middle or something. Your professor reminds me of someone who argues if a movie is a film or not.

  • 3ntranced@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    The light reflection on the worn asbestos tiles just wake some ancient feelings in me. I can smell this hallway in my mind.

  • doctorskull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    I respect his contributions to the game and I know this is a thermonuclear take but I fuckin hate Norman Rockwell’s art. The art style. The subjects he painted. Their facial expressions. The soup. Just not at all a fan of his whole deal.

    No shade at OP for sharing this, though 🙏

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      4 days ago

      It would cost you nothing to walk away and keep it yourself. There are plenty that think it’s brilliant. Nevermind extremely difficult to be this good at illustration.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        I think adults can and should disagree on things and feel free to voice opinions - especially if done as civilly as this. Not “this sucks” but just “it’s not too my taste”.

      • doctorskull@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        It also cost me nothing to share my subjective opinion of an artist’s work in a respectful way, in a forum conveniently designed for discussion of this exact artist.

        • GladiusB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          It also cost me nothing to give a shit about a crap take that doesn’t like good skill.

          • doctorskull@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            I apologize for upsetting you, I didn’t mean anything personally insulting to you. Hope you have a good day 🙏

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    There’s a former tough guy on his way to the hospital right now that severely underestimated that girl.

      • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Um … my comment was a joke (and an obvious one, I thought). Normal Rockwell never did a “Turn your head and cough” illustration. FYI “turn your head and cough” is something doctors used to have you do while holding your nuts in their hand, to detect a hernia.

        • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          They still do, no need for an FYI.

          No idea how many Rockwell paintings there are or why this would be construed a s a joke, but I guess “whoosh” me.