Last week I posted two portraits that I created for a brochure on developmental disabilities. Here's another face that I drew today. These illustrations were done in an effort to avoid two things. First, the cost of stock photography. The program doesn't have a great deal of money and they need to stretch their dollars. So this was an economical way to solve the art problem. Second was a need to stay somewhat ambiguous. The drawing takes it out of the specific and realistic and puts the figure in the context of fiction.
The reason that I get to draw another image is that the customer rejected one of the images. Not unusual. Illustration is a tricky effort. The customer gave little instruction other than asking for photos that were "dignified." After several years of working in this market, I have a sense of what she meant, but it still is very open for interpretation. So I expected that one or all might be out of line.
I have some first-hand experience with meeting and getting to know people with developmental disabilities. I took on this challenge because I thought it would be tough and would offer a great reward at the end if I was able to capture the essence of what I see in those people that I have met. My drawings reflected that emotion and, I feel, were beautiful and successful expressions of the unihibited joy that I always see in them.
I bow to the expertise of the customer--knowing what will work and what won't. But I was bruised by the words chosen to critique the drawing. I think that the customer wasn't aware that I drew these. She perhaps thought that they were clip art placed by John, and was commenting in a way that she thought was educational.
The critique said that the image looked like a charactature of "black face" and perhaps we could find something more "dignified." Again with that vague term. I am not so concerned with the latter, because I doubt she could define that word for me if she tried (not a criticism, just the way it is). But the term "black face" registered sour with me.
I thought I was representing the face as beautiful, animated, and joyful. The reference had big bright teeth, which were well-used, so I drew them in. It is the reference that insinuates that I was working from a characature of a stereotype that I find repulsive. Email does this. Take out the non-verbal, tone, and volume and the misinterpretation begins.
Anyway, it gave me the opportunity to draw this guy. Hopefully they will find him dignified. I hold my head high that the sending of the messages in terms of the drawings were dignified, beautiful, joyous, and well-intended. I can't account for the mind and vision of the viewer.
Pioneer...Last night on the Kennedy Center Awards, Carl Reiner referred to Mel Brooks as a pioneer. He also referred to his "genius mind and unsensorable mouth." I have a tough time deciding whether I like Blazing Saddles or Young Frankenstein more, but for this Illustration Friday theme, it seemed that the Western was more pioneerlike. "Work, work, work, hello boys, I miss you."
