Frank’s Soapbox #3
by Frank Santoro
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Why do “art books” by comics artists usually have titles like The Art of [Fill in the Blank] and not just show the artist’s name? This has always confused me. Like when you go into Barnes & Noble or Borders, all the books in the Art section usually just have the artist’s name.
Hunh.
Labels: comics vs. art
So that an 'art of…' book isn't confused with that artists comics? which would usually also have their name in large type on the cover?
It doesn't seem very odd to me.
Also, why is Nightcrawler inside that garbage can?
"The Comics of Matisse" by Scott McCloud
I shuddered when I saw that Byrne book. Oh, memories… check out the Vision bailing on his wife.
May I respectfully add: Why is it that said books are also the most hideously designed books in creation, almost without exception?
A lot of people don't know this, but that comic in Art of John Byrne was one of the first modern autobio comics.
You mean where he goes into space and makes out with a hot naked chick and then a robot scares him off and there's a baby? I KNEW that was real.
I also remember the guy being really hairy in that but I might be misremebering.
If it's any help, the robot is James Galton.
@ simon hacking, i would find it strange to confuse it with a comic because as soon as you pick it up and look at it, you can see it isn't a comic.
maybe i'm wrong, but do many comics have the artists name in big lettering on the front?
The Folk Art of John Byrne
I assumed it was a sort of 70's era attempt to say that Comics artists,and Sci-fi and fantasy book cover artists,and prog rock album cover artists were in fact actually creating "Art".
"The Art of ______ ____" became the standard. and all the publishers and artists who came after and were exclusively influenced by this section of art assumed that was how it was done, the formula repeated and the term stuck.
That makes sense, BVS. The other two examples I was going to put up were Gulacy and Kaluta – both 70's guys who have "The Art of-" titles for their art books. Kaluta's new art book looks awful. Dustin Harbin's right about these books generally being poorly designed.
Kaluta's new Madame Xanadu comic with Matt Wagner has been pretty great though.
I agree with BVS, but I think there was also another reason for using "The Art of _____" formua for titles. The fans and readers of these artists expected their work to exist in another form–as comics mostly, and perhaps as illustration secondarily. So a title like "The Art of ________" signaled to those readers that this wasn't a comic or an illustrated book, foregrounded the visual aspect, and in essence asked the readers to look at something they were used to seeing one way in a different way–as visual art for its own sake.
I always assumed that since "The Fantastic Art Of Frank Frazetta" was such a big hit, they were all copying that.
Is anyone else hankering for a "The Studio: 30 Years Later" Bob Levin-style article?
Yes. Commission one, please.
OK, consider this an open call: Is there someone out there that would like to do a "The Studio: 30 Years Later" article? We promise you'll receive professional editorial feedback, no money, and heckles from prominent bloggers. But, we will love you. Email me if so: dan (at) pictureboxinc (dot) com.