  |
| |
        
| ||
| You are in: Museum of Art >> Hall of Art Movements >> Golden Age Of Illustration | |
| |
|
| |
|
| ||
| You are in: Museum of Art >> Hall of Art Movements >> Golden Age Of Illustration | |
| |
By Neal McLaughlin
The Golden Age of Illustration is not and more than likely never will be considered to be an actual art movement. In fact, the artists who started this endeavor and those who followed in their paint strokes are rarely noted and their substantial contributions to their field have never been generally acknowledged.
This does not mean however, that we as the general public must continue to condone the principles set forth regarding what does or does not constitute "true" art.
Without illustrators, perhaps this idiom is why the art community fails to recognize these people as true artists; we would have been deprived of many exciting moments in literature. Especially when we read the classic books of Rudyard Kipling (Mowgali Stories-1936) and (Barbar, The Little Elephant-1931) as well as a host of other famous children books that relied on their wonderful illustrations to add a sense of depth and truism to their tales.
Imagine E.B. White's Stuart Little (1945) and Charlotte's Web (1952) without the beautiful drawings that gave physical characteristic to the excellently written description of the mischievous little mouse and the splendor the renderings gave to Charlotte and her offspring.
Recall how energetic the colorful renderings portrayed the troublesome cat in Dr. Seuss's Cat in the Hat. The vivid imagination of Dr. Seuss brilliantly portrayed the antics of this zany feline while the illustrations brought life to the character.
Magazines have depended on illustrators since the first publication rolled off the presses. Not only to support the contents of their stories and articles, but to attract readers to their magazines as well.
By using illustrations on their covers they added a sense of deepness and curiosity to what their magazine may contain and thusly entice a reader to pick up their publication and possibly enlist a new subscriber.
It is difficult NOT to consider The Golden Age of Illustration a movement, as it involved many individuals and several countries that were able to take advantage of modern technologies which allowed a more accurate and economical method of reproducing the graphic art that was in such demand by an energetic public.
European Golden Age illustrators, such as Arthur Rackman (1867-1939), Walter Crane (1845-1915) and Edmund Dulac (1882-1953) were motivated by the styles and techniques of the Pre-Raphaelites while finding inspiration from such design oriented movements as Arts and Crafts and Art Nouveau.
American artists, on the other hand, had subscribed to the theories and techniques of the Brandywine Tradition. Originally started by Howard Pyle and continued by his students including N.C. Wyeth (1882-1945), Edwin Austin Abbey (1852-1911) and Maxfield Parrish (1870-1966).
The Golden Age of Illustration is considered to be one of the greatest eras of American Art. Sadly, it is almost never mentioned, has gathered little support and even sadder is that it is yet to be truly appreciated.
When we consider the diversity of these talented craftsmen and passionate artists we need to remember that there has never been another group of these highly visible, yet meagerly profiled artists, prior to The Golden Age of Illustration...or since!
It would not be unfair to suggest that this group of illustrators, among them Norman Rockwell (1884-1978), N.C. Wyeth and Dorothy Lathrop , the first recipient of the Caldecott Medal for "most distinctive American picture book for children" (Animals of the Bible-1937), to be extensively studied by all artists, patrons and art historians.
Even in the 21st Century it appears that the illustrator's of books and magazines are yet to be acknowledged as passionate and talented members of an established art movement.
Art is subjective and it consists of many diverse schools of individuals who use their talents to portray their world and to make a viable
statement of their perspectives.
So the questions remains unanswered. Do illustrators not fall with in the criteria that says art is to be a personal interpretation of what one sees and understands as affecting their world?
And lastly, should artists be discouraged from following their calling because their field of endeavor is not yet recognized as being "true" art?