|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 20, 2020 7:41:31 GMT -5
Scot McCloud argues that energy/action and art detail are inversely related, which I can see some sense in. That is a very odd opinion from McCloud. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 20, 2020 8:38:53 GMT -5
I was either mis-remembering McCloud or remembering someone else's comments about McCloud's observations. What he actually said about detailed art was more about interior vs exterior. Audiences subconsciously insert themselves more into the action of a less detailed figure, says McCloud.  -------------------------------  -------------------------------  -------------------------------  -------------------------------  -------------------------------  |
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on May 24, 2020 8:49:47 GMT -5
You folks make me proud with your images depicting the various distinctive stylings of artistry to be found in comic books. Keep up the great work in digging up these unique art quirks...
|
|
|
|
Post by electricmastro on May 24, 2020 19:10:20 GMT -5
Steve Ditko’s slanted eyes and wide eyes on his faces, with how he draws the faces on females standing out to me in particular.   |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 24, 2020 19:10:23 GMT -5
Steranko could fill this thread with his numerous stylings. One of the more familiar is the "leaning Steranko run" seen in endless comics over the span of his career. A few samples-- TOP ROW: Strange Tales #153 (February, 1967) & Strange Tales #159 (April, 1968). BOTTOM ROW: Uncanny X-Men #49 (October, 1968), Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. #7 (December, 1968) & Marvelmania's Captain America poster (1970).  ...and for a nice extra, here's Paul Gulacy's very Steranko-ized tribute for the cover of Logan's Run #6 (June, 1977) with a bit of the "leaning Steranko run":  |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 24, 2020 21:43:00 GMT -5
I think McCloud doen't say as much as he might have regarding his own artistic choices: one thing that's always turned me off about his work is the way he drew his stand-in character with the big, round, blank glasses and the American comics nerd's uniform of checked shirt + t-shirt with vaguely superhero symbol: the exaggerated innocence of those big, blank eyes strikes me as begging for sympathy in a blatant, button-pushing fashion that automatically rubs me the wrong way.
I'm not saying this was necessarily deliberate on McCloud's part, at least not consciously, but that's the effect it's always had on me and it's probably the main reason I've never been able to bring myself to read his book all the way through. As soon as I set eyes on that character it's like fingernails on chalkboard to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2020 22:14:32 GMT -5
I think McCloud doen't say as much as he might have regarding his own artistic choices: one thing that's always turned me off about his work is the way he drew his stand-in character with the big, round, blank glasses and the American comics nerd's uniform of checked shirt + t-shirt with vaguely superhero symbol: the exaggerated innocence of those big, blank eyes strikes me as begging for sympathy in a blatant, button-pushing fashion that automatically rubs me the wrong way. I'm not saying this was necessarily deliberate on McCloud's part, at least not consciously, but that's the effect it's always had on me and it's probably the main reason I've never been able to bring myself to read his book all the way through. As soon as I set eyes on that character it's like fingernails on chalkboard to me. The vaguely super-hero symbol on his t-shirt isn't vague, it's his character from Zot...   and he explains the rationale behind the generic narrator figure-the less detail the artist provides the more the reader can invest themselves into the character and identify with t. It is detailed enough to be recognized as McCloud the narrator, but left generic enough to allow the reader to identify with it. Also the lack of eyes and generic features is intended to make the narrator more of an emotional blank slate (no expression of emotion through the eyes for example) to subtly or overtly influence the reader's emotional response to the information being presented. He is inviting the reader to feel something, but the intention is that what the reader feels is brought to the conversation by the reader and not shaped by the narrator.   It is very much intentional on McCloud's part and an execution of the theories he is putting forward through much of the content of the book. -M |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222 
|
Post by Confessor on May 25, 2020 3:42:12 GMT -5
I question McCloud's basic premise that readers need to be able to insert themselves into a piece of fiction or put themselves in the role of the hero in order to enjoy a story. I think that can sometimes be the case, but it smacks of a gross oversimplification to me. I've certainly enjoyed reading about some pretty repugnant characters with which I don't identify at all.
As for those two panels above of McCloud speaking to the reader, it makes absolutely no difference to me whether it's a detailed drawing of the author or a simplified version, in terms of which one I'd most enjoy following through the book. So yeah, I don't really agree with the theory he's putting forward here.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 25, 2020 11:15:29 GMT -5
I think McCloud doen't say as much as he might have regarding his own artistic choices: one thing that's always turned me off about his work is the way he drew his stand-in character with the big, round, blank glasses and the American comics nerd's uniform of checked shirt + t-shirt with vaguely superhero symbol: the exaggerated innocence of those big, blank eyes strikes me as begging for sympathy in a blatant, button-pushing fashion that automatically rubs me the wrong way. I'm not saying this was necessarily deliberate on McCloud's part, at least not consciously, but that's the effect it's always had on me and it's probably the main reason I've never been able to bring myself to read his book all the way through. As soon as I set eyes on that character it's like fingernails on chalkboard to me. The vaguely super-hero symbol on his t-shirt isn't vague, it's his character from Zot... and he explains the rationale behind the generic narrator figure-the less detail the artist provides the more the reader can invest themselves into the character and identify with t. It is detailed enough to be recognized as McCloud the narrator, but left generic enough to allow the reader to identify with it. Also the lack of eyes and generic features is intended to make the narrator more of an emotional blank slate (no expression of emotion through the eyes for example) to subtly or overtly influence the reader's emotional response to the information being presented. He is inviting the reader to feel something, but the intention is that what the reader feels is brought to the conversation by the reader and not shaped by the narrator. It is very much intentional on McCloud's part and an execution of the theories he is putting forward through much of the content of the book. -M Yeah, I read the panels before I wrote that post. I think his explanation doesn't go far enough and is either disingenuous or blind to the manipulativeness of his self-depiction. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 25, 2020 13:35:46 GMT -5
The vaguely super-hero symbol on his t-shirt isn't vague, it's his character from Zot... and he explains the rationale behind the generic narrator figure-the less detail the artist provides the more the reader can invest themselves into the character and identify with t. It is detailed enough to be recognized as McCloud the narrator, but left generic enough to allow the reader to identify with it. Also the lack of eyes and generic features is intended to make the narrator more of an emotional blank slate (no expression of emotion through the eyes for example) to subtly or overtly influence the reader's emotional response to the information being presented. He is inviting the reader to feel something, but the intention is that what the reader feels is brought to the conversation by the reader and not shaped by the narrator. It is very much intentional on McCloud's part and an execution of the theories he is putting forward through much of the content of the book. Yeah, I read the panels before I wrote that post. I think his explanation doesn't go far enough and is either disingenuous or blind to the manipulativeness of his self-depiction. It seemed to me that the text calls out the artistic intent to manipulate. That is, the art style seeks to generate a certain emotional response in the reader. It is manipulative in the sense that all art is. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 25, 2020 15:05:57 GMT -5
No, I'd go farther and say it's manipulative in a more specific way, one that turns me off in a way similar to the way I'm turned off by, for example, the cloying sentimentality of a Hallmark Christmas movie - to choose an extreme example that I imagine people will find easier to sympathise with than my reaction to McCloud.
Obviously not many readers feel the same about McCloud as I do. I'm just describing my gut reaction.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 25, 2020 15:10:21 GMT -5
He's also not mentioning another important factor of the simplistic choice...it's easier and quicker to produce multiple times.
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 25, 2020 17:26:19 GMT -5
It is very much intentional on McCloud's part and an execution of the theories he is putting forward through much of the content of the book. -M Does he explain why he moved his part to the other side?
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 25, 2020 17:27:24 GMT -5
Steve Ditko’s slanted eyes and wide eyes on his faces, with how he draws the faces on females standing out to me in particular.
Ohhh I've got one, how about that "ridged" hairstyle he used for Sandman and the Osborns (and many extras as well)!
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on May 26, 2020 10:46:22 GMT -5
Steve Ditko’s slanted eyes and wide eyes on his faces, with how he draws the faces on females standing out to me in particular. Ohhh I've got one, how about that "ridged" hairstyle he used for Sandman and the Osborns (and many extras as well)!
How about Romita replacing Peter's hair with a slab of Brown plastic?  |
|
