Comments on: Is Art Passé?

By: Neesha

Neesha — Thu, 18 May 2006 12:00:08 +0000

I’d personally comment that it isn’t the simple art that turns me off but rather the style of writing that tends to accompany the simple art. They almost always are gag-based and gag-based comics are far more hit-or-miss for me than any other category. Simple art lacks much of the gravitas for serious stories.

When I look at the comics I read, the majority of them don’t have simple art. The ones that do wouldn’t be comics like Boy on a Stick and Slither. PBF and Dinosaur have occasional strips that I like, though not enough for me to read them regularly. I’m more likely to jump to specific strips whenever I see a link to one and then go away.

On the other hand, I read PIXEL.

By: Fleen: Written by bitter, haggard wordbeasts » When art is important.

Fleen: Written by bitter, haggard wordbeasts » When art is important. — Thu, 18 May 2006 04:44:29 +0000

[...] Uncategorized Gary wrote an interesting post meant to start a discussion about the importance of art in webcomics. The discussion was interesting; the general consensus was that the art should match the style of the strip. [...]

By: The Kea

The Kea — Wed, 17 May 2006 09:14:20 +0000

Now having read into the archives of the comic in question I have to say, is this PBF lite? As in, similar art styles, similar types of punchlines, but no colour?

By: Gary Tyrrell

Gary Tyrrell — Wed, 17 May 2006 02:12:31 +0000

Good points by several people about art matching the intent of the strip.

However, I believe that newspaper strips (like Garfield or Dilbert) are probably not using simplistic art for aesthetic reasons, but rather commercial ones. Because newspaper strips are so damn small, detailed art does not reproduce well.

By: The Kea

The Kea — Tue, 16 May 2006 23:07:02 +0000

The comment by Lucas reminds me of Art History class, discussing the cubists. Picasso, while often drawing strange one-side-faced people, could paint truly veristic paintings. But he chose not to.

I think I agree with Sam. The key is making sure the artwork matches the text that is used. After all, one could argue that a lot of the comics that are ‘big’ are also very simplistic (Garfield, Dilbert, I dunno what else is big now, I don’t check out newspaper comics unless they’re online too). However, they have managed to use their pictures in a way that complements the text. Whether or not they copuld be better artists than that is really not important.

That said, I am always going to be drawn to well drawn detailed comics because it’s nice to see pretty things. I tend to assume a ‘sketchy’ looking comic is a particularly hobby/amatuer task for the creator.

By: Sammi

Sammi — Tue, 16 May 2006 22:58:38 +0000

Well, having had a chance to read through the Thingpart archives, I have to say that this is just a great comic. The childish art style compliments the often morbid humour of the comic – what can I say, it just works! Definately one for the White Ninja and Perry Bible Fellowship fans.

By: Lucas TdS

Lucas TdS — Tue, 16 May 2006 22:55:35 +0000

Yeah, Perry Bible is drawn simply… but have you seen that guy’s “real” drawing? That guy can *draw*.

By: Sam Logan

Sam Logan — Tue, 16 May 2006 20:20:34 +0000

Damn you, phpbb, for ruining my html tagging instincts!

By: Sam Logan

Sam Logan — Tue, 16 May 2006 20:19:25 +0000

The only “rule” of art and writing in comics is that the two have to compliment each other. Some narratives are more effective when paired with simple, or even childlike, artwork. Others are completely derailed by it.

Imagine if White Ninja and A Lesson is Learned switched artstyles. Not the writing, not the pacing… just the visuals. Would either comic be the better for it? I don’t think so. They’ve both already found the art styles that best compliment and emphasize and enhance what they are writing.

Of course, for most of us, our personal skill level is the biggest factor in determining how our comics look. But as long as your art works well with your narrative, [i]no one has to know[/i] that it’s the only way you could have done it. I have no idea if Chris Ware can draw realistic humans, but that didn’t really bother me when I was reading Jimmy Corrigan.

By: mikey c

mikey c — Tue, 16 May 2006 19:50:22 +0000

i have always had trouble enjoying comics with simple art. there’s something about the idea of a comic,a traditionally graphic artform, relying solely upon the verbal to convey its message. there is a reason that comics involving a lot of text tend to drag (the twix series’ in goats for example)

that said, simplicity can be part of the narrative device. white ninja, indie tits, etc.

as always, there are exceptions to every rule…but ah, isn’t that the beauty of art?