Here's a reveal of my new strip that I mentioned a few weeks ago. It's a one-off called Roy Lichtenstein's Schooldays and it appears in Viz No.225, out today! (And rather than gain full credit for the strip, Lichtenstein-like, I'd better point out that although the concept and basics of the strip were mine, Viz editors Graham Dury and Simon Thorp rewrote the script somewhat, improving on my original version.)
The cover, by Simon Thorp, also has a Lichtenstein theme, showing the pop artist the same amount of respect that he showed all those uncredited comic creators whose work he based his paintings on.
You'll find Viz on the top shelves of newsagents across the land. 52 pages of adult humour for £3.20. See the website for more details and a free preview of Simon Thorp's Johnny Fartpants page, set at Maggie Thatcher's funeral.
http://www.viz.co.uk/
Top marks, Lew! The cult of Lichtenstein, or theft as I call it, is beyond me and I will buy two copies of this Viz and recommend everyone buy it!
ReplyDeleteThanks Nigel. I've never understood the appeal of his ugly imitations either. I was pleased to see Dave Gibbons on TV the other week giving a very articulate and well reasoned p.o.v. on why Lichtenstein *isn't* the genius many claim he is.
DeleteI have a mixed view..at least he showed comics could be art pieces to the masses..But I can see what you are saying also...I've been to see his work in London..
ReplyDeleteBut the paintings didn't make the masses respect comics. Lichtenstein got all the respect, and the rewards, on the backs of works he'd emulated. He didn't even give credit to the artists whose work he copied.
DeleteAs Dave Gibbons said on TV, if you'd blown up any of the original panels to huge size, and isolated them from their original context, they'd have as much power as the copies, - possibly more so.
I've have respected Lichtenstein a bit if he'd created a brand NEW piece of artwork using those techniques. That would have been great. Did he ever do that?
No. John Severin, Bob Powell and others were his unpaid 'assistants' and he gets the money. And I agree with Dave Gibbons, Lichenstein's technique was mediocre. Comparing his three most famous "recreations" to their originals shows a lack of understanding of anatomy, composition, lighting and perspective. And as for brushwork...
ReplyDeleteSo much more to complain about, but I like the Viz (half) page!
When you said a "public figure" I had no idea it would be Lichtenstein! Good work there, and that's my new favourite Viz cover.
ReplyDeleteThe orginal pictures are so much better...thanks Nigel for the link at your blog..
ReplyDeletePeter Gray library computer
sad to say, people often know the thieves like Lichtenstein and Warhol, but don't known the original creators.. and talk about a difference in rate of pay..
ReplyDeleteThe irony is that Warhol did indeed copy Lichtenstein. That is, he too tried the 'comic-book approach' to art, but he decided to leave it all to Lichtenstein because Lichtenstein had quickly become firmly identified with that style of painting. So Lichtenstein was not this solitary 'thief' that everyone on these sites appears to detest. Lots of others in the pop art field at the time used comic-books as well as other facets of the commercial throwaway culture that had grown particularly in the USA after the war. Just that Lichtenstein became the most (in)famous in that particular approach to pop art. Anyway, whatever happend to Warhol after all that? who knows?
ReplyDelete