this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
581 points (98.8% liked)

Traditional Art

4482 readers
272 users here now

From dabblers to masters, obscure to popular and ancient to futuristic, this is an inclusive community dedicated to showcasing all types of art by all kinds of artists, as long as they're made in a traditional medium

'Traditional' here means 'Physical', as in artworks which are NON-DIGITAL in nature.

What's allowed: Acrylic, Pastel, Encaustic, Gouache, Oil and Watercolor Paintings; Ink Illustrations; Manga Panels; Pencil and Charcoal sketches; Collages; Etchings; Lithographs; Wood Prints; Pottery; Ceramics; Metal, Wire and paper sculptures; Tapestry; weaving; Qulting; Wood carvings, Armor Crafting and more.

What's not allowed: Digital art (anything made with Photoshop, Clip Studio Paint, Krita, Blender, GIMP or other art programs) or AI art (anything made with Stable Diffusion, Midjourney or other models)


make sure to check the rules stickied to the top of the community before posting.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 146 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

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:

[–] [email protected] 38 points 4 days ago (4 children)

I think it's pretty well accepted that, even for a classically trained artist, the three most difficult things to paint accurately are human hands, a horse in motion, and the concept of epistemology.

[–] funkless_eck 12 points 3 days ago

me I just paint the philosophy of science of entelechy like a fuckin moron

[–] prettybunnys 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

NGL, you had me in the first part

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 166 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (8 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 86 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 4 days ago

Says quite a bit that they’d rather be broke than “woke”.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

Very cool, and good to know considering the points another poster made about his art being a driving force behind the nostalgia for a Better (read: whiter) past that has ruined so many American minds over the years.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I have a print of this on wood. My mom got it from her mom. We've had it my whole life. I've moved 22 times. I've lost almost everything I've ever owned at least twice. Very few possessions make it through that many moves. But we've kept this picture the whole time. It always hangs in the kitchen, except for this time around when it hands above my bed in the living room.

The only other things we own that we've had even close to as long are a painting of Snoopy I pulled out of someone's curbside trash, a red table we got off the side of the road, and some antique pottery and glassware of grandparents that hasn't been unboxed since the 90s.

Edit to add, view from my bed: 1000002556

Ignore the dust/cobwebs. I do not dust like I should.

[–] ScrambledLogic 28 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

The girl's rolled up sleeves. We all know that anyone who takes the time to calmly roll up their sleeves before a fight is a badass.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

Even the very slight grin on the principal. Sort of saying “I know we gotta punish her…but dammit did that boy deserve the beating”

[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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

Isn't it J. C. Leyendecker?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

I think that's because he's in the uncanny valley bordering on kitsch. And doing realism whilst everybody in art was being postmodern and abstract.

I think he's in the same vein of Jan Steen, but he was doing it in the sixties.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Oh good, it's not just me who sees that... That's totally the self satisfied smile of someone who knows she gave better than she got

[–] Hideakikarate 5 points 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.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That grin says you should see the other guy

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 days ago

Yeah. You can tell she WON that fight. :)

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

I do my job in various buildings of all kinds ages and construction. Recently I was in an old building like in the painting, and the radiators under the windows came on for the first time in the season.

It smelled like burnt dust and the air was dry and warm. Gave me the same kind of feeling and reminded me of my elementary school

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Reminds me of Pippi Longstocking, anybody ever read those?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Other kid not drawn because that kind of violence and gore would be unacceptable in the 50s.

("You should see the other guy.")

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 days ago (13 children)

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 🙏

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This is a great piece. (And damn, that principal is smoking hot.)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Pretty sure that's mom come to deal with the girl. In the painting's day the dad would be at work while mom was probably SAHM. Well, unless you're referring to the male principal behind the desk...then to each their own.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, the man behind the desk. :)

The mom is pretty cute too, though the principal's clothes are a bit more timeless.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

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

[–] captain_aggravated 2 points 3 days ago

I've got a print of the "waiting room at the vet" one, and I swear he copy/pasted the untied leather shoes from that one.

load more comments
view more: next ›