Thursday, July 14, 2011
Narrowminded thoughts on B&W art...
I know I'm in the minority here. I know lots of folks love B&W art. And I'm not saying they are wrong to like it and I'm not bad mouthing any particular artists... specifically... but I cant stand it. Back in the day I practically devoured MAD. It helped flesh out my sense of humor. I loved that stuff.
So I'm not sure you can say I've never been exposed to it enough to appreciate it.
But by and large if they don't care enough to color it, why should I care enough to buy it? It ain't like its cheaper or anything.. I fully realize I'm shutting myself off to some fantastic stuff from some dynamite people, but generally, I can live w/o it if the book is not containing pigment.
However nothing is absolute. There are 2 notable exceptions to my being a neanderthal on this subject.
Sin City (or FM B&W's) -
His art has a positive/negative space dynamic that makes it hard to tell if you are being pushed or pulled to something. The net effect is something beautiful that I don't think you can really reproduce in color. Its unique.
While not lush, it has unmistakable texture. ANY color use is minimized and well intended for effect.
The Walking Dead -I think if this book had color it would veer irredeemably to the gross out shock value factor and lose its way or its readers. I love the juxtaposition of who is more horrific? The remaining humans or the "monsters"... at least the monsters are defined and predicable. Color would be a gratuitous distraction from the story, which is like "Comicbook-Crack" for me.