On Resisting

Occasionally, an illustrator finds herself with a commission that ends up being creatively less than desirable. This usually entails the “dumbing-down” of the content either by over-zealous protectors of the public welfare (eg. those who think that somehow a less-realistic artistic approach to science material will be more “friendly” to their markets). Let us not confuse this with genuine art direction where good design and concept are real objectives. The first brush with an art director might leave your ego a tad bruised, but a false ego should be checked at the door when it comes to a collaborative career like illustration. However, you will find that art direction takes into consideration much more than concept and design when you are dealing with certain markets. As we know, illustration is about storytelling-- and storytelling is rooted very deeply in ideology.

Does one resist or cave to the standards and expectations of an industry that makes its dollar on public opinion? That depends on a great many factors. You will find during your career as an illustrator that you will dig your heels in at times and at other times concede your position. You will consider questions like: How badly do I want/ need the job? Is conceding my position or view worth the money they are paying me? What issue is it that I am I dealing with and how critical is this to my future with this company? Will this damage my integrity or self-esteem?  Can I live with my decision after I've made it? Will my decision make it easier or difficult to do the work? There are a hundred more.

There are of course other ways of dealing with industry standards other than just giving in or telling the publisher to take a hike. Some artists will make the work they are expected and treat it just like it’s “a job,” giving it no more thought than if they punched a time card in a factory. Most of us, though, consider illustration to be more like a calling, so this is usually a less-than-satisfactory strategy.  Some artists will do the job, making whatever obligatory changes for the publication, but when the artwork is returned to them, they change the image back to the way they first envisioned it. This strategy is one which takes into consideration the idea that an illustration can have a legacy beyond its publication. There is yet another alternative to consider. One can be subversive. One can embed meaning into an image that undermines its original intent. One can create images that defy public opinion or even help to overturn it. Of course there are professional risks to this as well.

An illustrator can be more than just someone who makes pretty images for hire. An illustrator can use her considerable skills in building an image to challenge the accepted meanings and ideas within a culture.  An industry such as publishing which makes its living by reinforcing the cultural and ideological status quo will obviously try to hire illustrators who augment its view. But the illustrators who subvert or invert the stories of the dominant paradigm help to move culture forward an inch at a time by making visible the alternatives. This is a certainly a political position.