 |
| Gil Elvgren, Looking for Trouble, 1953 |
I notice that a few bloggers have marked our nation’s Independence Day
in some fashion, so I thought I would do the same. Since I’m no longer interested in the patriotic
folderol surrounding the event, I’ll just sit home by the computer this evening
and waste a little more time creating my own trifle regarding this national
holiday.
I remember once watching the annual fireworks display from a
very high floor in one of the old World Trade Center buildings at a little viewing party thrown
in the office of an acquaintance about 25 years ago. I found the view of the fireworks display looking
down on it to be far less thrilling than looking up at it. But the crowds actually attending this event
at ground level are unbearable, so I no longer bother leaving my apartment to
venture riverward – east or west, depending on the promoter’s whim. None of my fireworks forays in my youth resulted
in particularly pleasant memories, anyway – some memorably unpleasant, as a
matter of fact. The holidays, including this one, however, are excellent days
to stay home and paint on a still life. I
believe there is something inherently noble about engaging in an activity that is
so far removed from the media spell cast on the entire country. It’s like being a martyr for the cause of
painting. And sometimes I paint a little
better on such occasions.
At any rate, I found the perfect image for this national celebration
in a 1953 illustration by Gil Elvgren, the best pin-up artist by far of all
those great illustrators from the 1930s to 1960s who plied the joyous trade of depicting
feminine pulchritude at its peak. I saw
a show of his pin-ups in a Soho gallery some years ago
and was smiling about it for days afterward.
He used photo references, of course, but he started out with pretty Minnesota
girls under the age of 21, and could draw so well that you don’t look at his
illustrations and immediately say “photograph.”
You just smile and admit that those luscious figures he painted are simply
fabulous.
By contrast, that same show included a portrait Elvgren did
from life -- his wife, as I recall. And it
cheered me a little bit to realize that it wasn’t very good. Same thing with Norman Rockwell and a lot of other
great illustrators. They all wanted to
paint like Sargent or Zorn, et al, in their illustrations, as Andrew Loomis
wrote about in his comprehensive book, Creative Illustration, but they couldn’t
come close when faced with the real thing in front of them. Yes, there is a great divide between illustration
and real painting. But don’t tell
anybody, because you will just get cussed out.
