Norman Rockwell

[LizStreithorst]

Just curious.  I know what I think.

[Mugwump]

I say he's an artist....but we'd all be right....

"Norman Perceval Rockwell was a 20th-century American author, painter and illustrator. His works enjoy a broad popular appeal in the United States for their reflection of American culture." Wikipedia

[Mugwump]

....good quesrion, ya got me looking now.....

?Norman Rockwell may not be important as an artist ? whatever that is ? but he has given us a body of work which is unsurpassed in the richness and variety of its subject matter and in the professionalism ? often brilliant ? of its execution. Unlike many of his colleagues (painters with publishers instead of galleries) he lives in and for his work and so he makes it important.?

This statement is contradictory at best. It is the kind of ambivalence and confusion that follow my grandfather?s work to this day. But Buechner then goes on to make an appeal that ?illustration should be considered an aspect of the fine arts.?

Admittedly, it is Rockwell himself who kept publicly pronouncing, ?I?m not a fine arts man, I?m an illustrator.? Two separate and distinct worlds and sensibilities. One of the reasons my grandfather led with this was emotional safety ? if he limited the way his artwork would be observed he could avoid the derision that might have come from the critics for trying to pass himself off as an artist with a capital A. He did this with other aspects of his work, such as his quips that he couldn?t paint pretty, sexy women (this, of course, wasn?t true, as evidenced by the many appealing women he painted throughout the years). He was humble to a fault.

Illustration is what Rockwell trained for. In my grandfather?s mind, fine arts painters will not accept limitations or restrictions ? they are free to express themselves, encouraged to break all the rules. The illustrator is working not just to express him/herself but must work to please the client, art editor and the public. The illustrator?s work is ?meant to be seen in mass reproduction,? the fine artist?s ?in the original? (Buechner). Rockwell embraced and accepted these restrictions. In fact, he thrived under these limitations and found ways to excel, grow and expand his work within, and in spite of, these confines.

Rockwell?s artistic gods were Rembrandt and Pieter Brueghel. Rembrandt was great, according to my grandfather, because he was a great lover of humanity and that translated into his work in the most powerful way. What do we think of when we think of Rembrandt? The extraordinary faces and the incomparable light he captured. Rockwell revered Brueghel because he was a ?great recorder of the times.? Both observations could easily be applied to Rockwell?s own work ? he was a great observer of human behavior, his love for humanity was an integral part of his art and, first and foremost, he was a storyteller:

?My life?s work ? and my pleasure ? is to tell stories to other people through pictures... I try to use each line, tone, color and arrangement; each person, facial expression, gesture and object in my picture for one supreme purpose ? to tell a story, and to tell it as directly, understandably and interestingly as I possibly can.?

[LizStreithorst]

I don't think less of him because I consider him an illustrator.  His work reflects life and history in our time.  That has great value.  The majority but not all  of his work showed an idyllic America.  But it has no subtlety whatsoever..   I never see any ambiguity in it.  Isn't the unanswered question what turns good work into art?

[Mugwump]

I don't think less of him because I consider him an illustrator.  His work reflects life and history in our time.  That has great value.  The majority but not all  of his work showed an idyllic America.  But it has no subtlety whatsoever..   I never see any ambiguity in it.  Isn't the unanswered question what turns good work into art?

different mediums of work.....artist/painter...illustrater/story teller....??

[Ron Sower]

Isn't the unanswered question what turns good work into art?

Liz, is that an accepted definition of art?  Not challenging you...I just want to know...I never studied any art course...

[BallAquatics]

Historically he was both.  As for art, he produced more than four thousand original works in his lifetime.  He was also commissioned to illustrate more than forty books.

Dennis

[wallace]

I'm not good at either/or answers. No matter how you define art, a particular drawing or painting would be art for some people, perhaps not for others. A winged sphinx is an example of great art. Its not sentimental, its not trying to be original for the sake of being original.

This is a Rockwell-like picture of me on a dock with the kids. A watercolor artist I know liked it so much she made a painting of it. Without the ski-doos!

[Mugwump]

..great shot.................great times....thanks for sharing  ...I like it a lot too...

[BillT]

I am not clear on the distinction between artist and illustrator.
Seems to me illlustrator could be a sub-set of artist.

Consider the following:
Photography: art or illustration (it reproducing reality in a way)? Some photography is considered art. Same with film/movies.
Is all bad art illustration or something else (depending on the media)?
I would argue bad art is still art, it just bad.
Similarly, I would argue that advertising art is still art in service of getting people to buy stuff.
Bird or fish books: graphics in them could be considered art (such as Audubon).

When I recently took courses in Media Arts I was exposed to a bit of art theory and was not impressed. A lot of it seemed to be defining sub-sections of the overall art endeavor.

[Mugwump]

I am not clear on the distinction between artist and illustrator.
Seems to me illlustrator could be a sub-set of artist.

Consider the following:
Photography: art or illustration (it reproducing reality in a way)? Some photography is considered art. Same with film/movies.
Is all bad art illustration or something else (depending on the media)?
I would argue bad art is still art, it just bad.
Similarly, I would argue that advertising art is still art in service of getting people to buy stuff.
Bird or fish books: graphics in them could be considered art (such as Audubon).

When I recently took courses in Media Arts I was exposed to a bit of art theory and was not impressed. A lot of it seemed to be defining sub-sections of the overall art endeavor.

....yup, the 'eyes of the beholder' basically....

[wallace]

This reminds me, the most impressive work of art I have seen was the 'Winged Victory of Samothrace'. It made chills run up and down my soul... can't describe it without sounding like I believe in magic. A picture is flat, you have to see it in person.

[Mugwump]

This reminds me, the most impressive work of art I have seen was the 'Winged Victory of Samothrace'. It made chills run up and down my soul... can't describe it without sounding like I believe in magic. A picture is flat, you have to see it in person.