Friday, May 29, 2009

Art or comics

More Buttercup Festival.

I've had a few "is it thises or thates?" recently, here's another: is this comics or is it fine art? I'm leaning towards the latter. Comic strips should ideally have more immediate communication and accessibility, but as fine art it's wonderful.

I sympathize, I've tended towards the same whenever I've attempted any kind of comic in the past. For a person who loves pictures and abstraction it's hard to compromise with that just so people can "understand". :-)





4 comments:

Joe Dick said...

I think those work. The audience doesn't need to be beaten over the head with a punchline.

As for whether it's art, I don't know, but I do recall a funny Calvin & Hobbes strip where Calvin went over that kind of thing - "low" versus "high" art. For example, a painting of a comic strip: high art. A comic strip itself: low art. I don't see why that should be the case, but as things stand in the "art world" that's the way it's seen.

David Troupes said...

Your comment that --
"Comic strips should ideally have more immediate communication and accessibility, but as fine art it's wonderful"
-- is interesting, but really I think that you're confusing the medium with the message. The term "comic strip" refers (in my mind) to the structural elements only: words, pictures, panels, etc. Whether these are used to say something immediate and accessible is beside the point of a work's status as comic strip. As for that horrible term, "fine art," I'd be happy never to hear it again. It removes much more meaning and subtly from a discussion than it adds.

But anyway, thanks for linking to my comic!

eolake said...

You have valid points, David.

I guess what I meant was that to me, they work OK as stories/jokes, but they work wonderfully as pictures.

(Of course they might grow on me as stories too.)

Anonymous said...

This is pretentious garbage. It might work if the dude could draw, but he can't. That's probably why he went into cartooning.