The Line is Dead..

     The "Imaginary Beings" project I was set culminates tomorrow at 4pm so I thought I'd spew forth some of my progress (the parts I remembered to document).

     The creature I picked was the mysterious and mythical "Pelican". I imagine most people know what one of those is, but the myth that goes with it originates in Egypt, which, along with the following image, was the catalyst for the theme of the entire project.

Title unknown, 2007, Library of Congress

     As part of the project I was required to design and produce a screenprinted wallpaper. I decided, after hours of contemplation, that I wanted to incorporate three stages/ characters from the story as well as a symbol or two. After further hours of tracing, organising into a sort of grid formation and impulsive stipple shading to top it off, I finally got my work onto screens and spent yesterday afternoon making a delightful, three-colour, bleeding pelican/ dead baby bird wallpaper fit for any home or office (I'll add pictures at a later date).

     I also had to produce a 3D model of my chosen character. I originally intended to produce a paperfold creature for this however, having made a sort of prototype of my design I decided that it was too geometric. So now I'm sitting in my room, partially clothed and putting the final touches on a pelican made out of bits of ripped up brown paper and Pritt-stick; much better.

Discussion Forum

Where is the content? Where is the comment?

     In an article for Creative Review back in February of this year, Lawrence Zeegen: Writer, Illustrator and Dean of Design at University of the Arts London, poses a rather controversial  'question' as to whether or not the modern Illustrator conveys any message or meaning within their work.

     To illustrate his quite frankly one-sided argument, Zeegen speaks of the juxtaposition of a billboard by Shrigley (depicting a raised fist with the words "fight the nothingness" in his own signature scrawl) and the annual contemporary art fair "Pick Me Up" where, in Zeegen's opinion, up-and-coming illustrators are doing just the opposite: creating meaningless illustrative "eye candy" for the enjoyment of others within the illustration community.

     Though I do see some truth in Zeegen's argument; does there need to be an explicit meaning within every piece of illustration work you see? Can it not be enjoyed without it?

     Personally I find that, although subtext can indeed make an image more interesting (particularly in advertising and communication design; coincidentally an area in which Zeegen specialises), ambiguity or perhaps even a vague hint towards an unclear or non-existent meaning are far more intriguing. Illustration (and art in general) is, in my opinion, far more appealing when there isn't something to 'get' but instead an opportunity for the viewer to make of it what they will through their own personal interpretation.

     All in all, it made for an interesting insight into the mind of an advertising and communication designer. However, given that the article consisted almost entirely of brash, intentionally biased opinion, the only thing I really learned of was the arrogance of the writer.

Exciting News!

     Well, exciting for me anyway. As half the people on my course look forward to the New York trip in a couple of weeks, I get to to be childishly giddy about the quest to London that my best friend Charlie has organised for us.
     As if being in London isn't already enough of an adventure, we plan to visit a whole bunch of galleries, bars, museums and such including the Hunterian museum, which, if you want to have your mind blown clean out of your face, you should definitely visit.

     On top of all these frivolities, we also get to visit, talk at and have a bit of an interview with one of my all time favourite illustrators, Scott Move AND get tattooed by the chap.

     If you're not totally jealous by now then you're not reading hard enough.