In my opinion, William Blake falls into both of these categories. As far as illustrators go, I believe that an illustrator can be a fine artist. Fine art is created for enjoyment.... this may be achieved through imagination, aesthetics, and intellectual reason. Although an illustrator may act more as graphic designer in the way that they create images to support literature (books, ads, etc.), they are still interpreting to create an idea. In Williams case it was for his own ideas. His poetry was art in itself and going one step further, he brought his words to life through imagery. He also treated the letters as pieces of art, bringing the images into them and vice versa. It seems his vivid imagination traveled a bit beyond seeing his dead brother's soul "rising through the ceiling." He used printing and design, meshing it into a form of fine art. To be interpreted... to be taken in. It seems that Blake was ahead of his time. People pegged him for mad. He also carried the torch for movements to come. Romanticism being one of them. Most artists that have made the history books have been engaged in many different media and art forms. I believe limiting yourself only allows your understanding to travel just that far. Allowing yourself to explore every aspect of what your interests have to offer will give you satisfaction and understanding. William Blake is a great example of this. I would call him an illustrator, but I would also call him a fine artist.
No comments:
Post a Comment