How did postmodernism impact on illustration? Postmodernism is a complex and influential art movement that, unlike its predecessors, aligned the attitudes and values of its time with its art forms, the latter being a reflection of the former. Many believe that postmodernism paved the way for later art movements and the forms of creative expression that soon followed (contemporary art, for example). Although some may insist that postmodernism is on the decline, its aesthetic characteristics have seen a resurgence in illustration and design circles. Its sense of irony and informality as well as the use of appropriation can also be evidenced within the work of current practitioners – showing that the tremors of postmodernism can still be felt today. This essay will explore how the attitudes of postmodernism have shaped our visual culture as well as what we now value artistically compared to that of a century ago. This reshaping and redefining of art that came with postmodernism has most definitely impacted the creative fields, allowing for a much greater scope on what can be made, what can be said and conveyed, where creative work can exist, and who can make it. This shift away from traditional artistic values (such as technical skill, background, class...) has made art and design spheres less restricted by the boundaries of individual creative practices. In turn, illustration has opened up entirely and grown as a discipline that spans across many contexts and formats which continue to evolve today. Charles Jencks highlights the relationship between modernism and postmodernism in ‘The PostModernism Reader’ (2009), inferring that the failings of Modernism its capitalistdriven, materialistic ethos were unrealistic, stating that ‘today’s socialism is not quite the goal that the Modernist Karl Marx had in mind’ (pg 15). Jencks cites the principles of Modernism as ‘straightforwardness’, ‘transparency’, and ‘honest simplicity’ – a rather clearcut view of the world. In contrast, he pins ‘irony’ and ‘ambiguity’ to postmodernism which mirrors a growing cynicism concerning politics and societal systems which aren’t as idyllic as they are often promised to be. The demolition of the PruittIgoe housing project in St. Louis Missouri, 1972, has been dubbed as ‘the Death of Modern Architecture’ (Jencks, 2009) – over the years following its construction, the project’s living conditions soon descended into poverty, overcrowding, and crime. Jencks seems to attribute the demolition of PruittIgoe to not addressing the needs of its occupiers, saying that Modern projects that ‘failed to perform within the various codes of the users’ (pg 22) were often destroyed much like they were in the instance of St. Louis. Making this an example of how these systems didn’t live up to their ideal expectations nor did they function as promised by their Modernist creators. In Postmodernism at the V&A (2011), Jencks claims that postmodernism is ‘another crisis of Modernism, modernisation, modernity’ with an attitude that is ‘ironic about the failures (of capitalism)’. In some ways, postmodernism is purely a reaction, a response, a shift in values that reflects a changing society and a world that is becoming more diverse and varied. Postmodernism is a ‘social style’ (Jencks, 2009, pg 24) and Modernism an ‘elite style’ (pg 24). Jencks acknowledges that the world is ‘still very much in a modern period’ and that ‘it still dominates most cultures’ (pg 33), but that ‘its critics and creators have moved elsewhere’ (pg 33). This suggests that in a world where many things remain unchanged, certain groups seek out something new.
The rigid conventions prevalent in Modernism, specifically its architecture, are criticised by Robert Venturi in ‘Learning from Las Vegas’ (1972). Venturi notes that early Modern architects appropriated ‘existing and conventional industrial vocabulary’ in their designs ‘without much adaptation’ (pg 3) which perpetuated the recurring Modernist themes of massproduction and capitalism. Modernism ‘(rejects) the combination of fine art and crude art’ (Venturi, 1972, pg 6), which depicts the predominantly elitist view of Modernism. Yet, Venturi remarks that gaining influence and ‘insight’ from ‘the commonplace’ is hardly new, stating ‘Fine art often follows folk art’(pg 3) – which sits well against the values of postmodernism which encourages a blend of the ‘high’ arts and ‘low’ arts, where the distinction between the two is less clear. Throughout the text, Venturi cites the Las Vegas strip as a sort of epicentre of postmodernist architecture – a combination of styles, influences, and aesthetics, that shamelessly acknowledges its rather capitalist motivations with an excess of advertisements; ‘Symbol dominates space. Architecture is not enough’ (pg 13). The author recognises that critics take a disliking to the kitschy, dated mix of architectural styles, because it is a far cry from being timeless or pure: ‘Those who acknowledge the roadside eclecticism denigrate it, because it flaunts the cliché of a decade ago as well as the style of a century ago. But why not? Time travels fast today’ (Venturi, 1972, pg 8) This holds a particular relevance to the criticism of Modernism’s serious outlook on what constitutes as ‘good’. That an object, namely an artistic object, must only be comprised from one element. This purist attitude is refuted in Postmodernism at the V&A (2011), in which architect Robert A.M. Stern states ‘There are no absolutes in art’.
A similar sentiment is reiterated in ‘Modernism and Postmodernism: An Overview with Art Examples’, where it is said that ‘there is no unified theory of postmodernity’ (Barrett, T. 1997). Arguably, this lack of certainty within postmodernism leads to a greater freedom in expressing ideas, and a much less stringent stance on artistic output. Pop art was especially revolutionary in dismantling existing perceptions of art, with Barrett recalling how ‘Arthur Danto (1992) credits Warhol with bringing about “the end of art”...’. In the text, Barrett cites Danto’s claim that the piece titled Brillo Boxes (1964) prompted the end of Modernism, which came with a statement from Warhol himself, that ‘one could no longer tell the difference between an ordinary object and an art object just by looking at it’ (Barrett, T. 1997,
pg 24). The example of Brillo Boxes in particular conveys a number of postmodernist traits. It shows appropriation, using existing imagery and brand identities but transplanting them into an environment that is different from their usual setting. Barrett (1997) refers to appropriation as ‘a central postmodernist strategy’ (pg 256), saying that by borrowing from existing sources postmodernists remind us that ‘originality is absent in most traditions of art’. This may not end in the individuality that the Modernists dreamed of, but the challenge for the postmodernists arises in ‘putting old information into new contexts’, ultimately ‘creating new meaning’ (pg 26). By removing the Brillo packages from their usual supermarket context, the artwork creates a conversation; Are they a comment on American consumerism? Do they criticise the absurdity of galleries, and their power to elevate an object to a higher status? Although postmodernist architecture had existed solidly since the 1970s, a pivotal moment in postmodernist design was the debut of The Memphis Group in 1981, whose style would go on to have a great impact on the art and design scene of the 1980s. Memphis was a group of designers that formed in Italy, producing postmodernist furniture and products between 198187. They drew influence from pop art and art deco, with patterns that could be found in the surfaces of kitschy 1950s diners, and graphic prints that were evocative of those in comic books. Dense, geometric forms and garish, clashing colours gradually characterised the work of the design group. The vibrant and flamboyant spirit of Memphis was worlds away from the restraint that dominated Modernism. Despite the group’s shortlived existence, their exuberant look and unapologeticallygaudy attitude have seemed to emerge in areas of design and illustration today. Whether this is an acknowledgement of Memphis’ influence, or a rising trend that looks back at the 80s aesthetic as a whole, similar visual traits can definitely be evidenced in the work of contemporary creatives.
A direct reappearance of Memphisinspired design is that of Nathalie du Pasquier, who was an original member of the design group. Her signature textile designs that featured bold, jarring patterns have been recreated in collaborations with a number of wellknown fashion brands. Of course these new uses for du Pasquier’s textiles may lack the intentions and meaning of Memphis, which was revolutionary at its height. However, it could be that their aesthetic embodies a certain tone that fits into creative work today; fun, lively, and experimental.
The bold, graphic visuals that epitomise Memphis may align with today’s tastes so well due to the progression of graphic art over the years, as well as the rise in the popularity of illustration and design. For instance, Kate Moross’ design work commonly involves a heavy use of colour, and complex arrangements of abstract forms that are crisp in appearance. There is a sense of movement and liveliness in Moross’ designs that, in my opinion, are shared with du Pasquier’s own work. One is perhaps just a more contemporary, digital version of the other. When reflecting on postmodernist values and how they may apply to contemporary practitioners, I believe that David Shrigley is a visual artist whose work could potentially be classified as postmodernist, or at least as a byproduct of the movement. In Shrigley’s work there is solidarity between the aesthetic tone of an image, as well as its content or the message it conveys. His drawings could be viewed as ‘antiart’ due to their simplistic execution, lacking in a high level of skill and finesse (which is normally associated with art). This naive visual style relates to early postmodernist attitudes of challenging perceptions about art, and defying existing rules and expectations.
The tone of this artist’s work is very tongueincheek and satirical, poking fun at contemporary art and social issues. There is no formality to them, and when social or political subjects are touched upon, they provide no solution or optimism. Again, sharing the ironic and cynical outlook of postmodernism.
Similar qualities can be observed within Ian Stevenson’s illustrations, which also have a wry sense of humour and a strange tone. Use of appropriation is evidenced in Stevenson’s images too, turning wellknown cartoon characters into slightly off versions of themselves. These caricatures are portrayed in a crude, distorted drawing style which contributes to the overall bizarreness of them. Handwritten slogans and phrases are often introduced too such as ‘seen it before’, ‘I could have done that’ – demonstrating an awareness of how audiences view creative work, and how Stevenson’s own work doesn’t fit into this definition. Irony, sarcasm, and criticisms of modern life and excesses run throughout Stevenson’s illustrations, all bearing relevance to postmodernism. When comparing Shrigley and Stevenson, tonally their work is very similar aside from Stevenson’s heavier use of appropriation when it comes to pop culture references of brands and characters. Despite the aesthetic and tonal similarities, Shrigley’s work exists in a fine art context, mainly seen through exhibitions and events, whereas Stevenson’s body of work fits more into an illustrative context. This could potentially show a collapse in disciplinary spheres – with the respective fields of fine art and illustration no longer being as clearly defined as they once were. Shrigley’s work falls outside of traditional definitions of fine art as it is not representational, nor does it exhibit a great deal of technical skill. Similarly with Stevenson, his illustrations aren’t solely featured in magazines, as his murals can also be found around London on walls and skips and if anything could be viewed as forms of antiadvertising that carry personal and arguably controversial messages. The varied nature of Stevenson’s illustration work makes it difficult to place specifically, as it doesn’t solely consist of commissioned work (such as advertising or editorial work for example). The generation of personal content and selfinitiated projects is increasingly common for contemporary illustrators, where they carve out their own niche as opposed to slotting into a massmarket. As previously mentioned, postmodernism worked on dismantling the barriers that existed within the arts for decades, believing there to be no such thing as a clear definition of what art should be. In some ways, I feel that this attitude can be applied to other creative disciplines such as illustration. Looking back on what illustration once was and where it has now progressed to shows that it has became a broader, more inclusive space where a wide array of formats can be accepted. The illustration of the 19th century was solely viewed as a derivative form of fine art mainly produced for commercial purposes, such as advertising or publishing. Many prominent figures within the field (John Tenniel, for example) were highly skilled draughtsman, and possessing great technical ability was almost always expected. Whereas illustration nowadays exists in multiple contexts, for many different audiences and can take on many different appearances. In contrast with traditional illustration which took reference from classical art and was often very representational in its style, contemporary illustration can be realistic, imaginative, naive, or a hybrid of all of these things. Today’s illustration is also free to borrow from a multitude of reference points and sources; past, present, factual, or more abstract still – from the artist’s very own experiences.
Barrett (1997) states that postmodernists criticise modernity by referencing postmodernism and modernism respectively as ‘the suffering and misery of peasants under monarchies’, the ‘oppression of workers’ under ‘capitalist industrialisation’ (pg 18) along with other comparisons that suggest the modernist, traditional view to be damaging and noninclusive. By contrast it is inferred that postmodernism is surely the opposite – a nonhierarchical, nonexclusive space in which people of any status or background are free to create. Ed Cheverton is a notable illustrator that is worth mentioning as a way of demonstrating how the boundaries of illustration and visual art have been pushed. Cheverton’s career is greatly varied, spanning from a selfmade small publishing house (Jazz Dad Books), work for Anorak magazine, to making comics, toys, zines, sketchbooks and a number of other personal projects. Cheverton’s work proves that contemporary illustration really is limitless, and that visual art can be done on a small, independent scale.
The visual traits that encompass the work of this illustrator are worlds away from ‘classical’ illustration, suggesting that our aesthetic focuses have shifted entirely. The tone of Cheverton’s illustration is naive, playful, and free – with emphasis on the very basic foundations of image making which are colour and shape. His collages, for example, are sporadic and expressive – drawing influence from jazz music, the fantasygenre, comics, and games which produces a really imaginative and eclectic character. This could be seen as appropriation, which to Barratt (1997) is ‘a central postmodernist strategy’. The influences that are present in Ed Cheverton’s projects could be an instance of ‘old information [being put] into new contexts’ which, in turn, provides ‘new meaning’ (Barratt 1997) and in the case of this practitioner a unique world of characters and narratives is made. Relating back to the shift away from modernist values in art, Ed Cheverton’s images are whimsical, kinetic, and have a human, handmade feel. They could not be further from qualities of uniformity and elitism. There is clearly a sense that Cheverton creates solely for the enjoyment of it, and that his motivations aren’t entirely profitdriven (for instance, only distributing zines in person or at fairs, not massproducing them to be sold online). There is also a focus on people, collaboration, and the illustration community in what Cheverton does which harks back to earlier mentions of folk art, and to reiterate, this sits alongside Jencks’(2009) view of postmodernism being a ‘social style of the arts’, compared to the ‘elitist’ intentions of modernism. In conclusion, although postmodernism may not have had a direct and immediate impact on illustration, it is evident that its influence on the arts and creative industries as a whole has, in turn, made the field of illustration much more diverse and open. I believe that postmodernism has
helped to make it known that artistic disciplines are malleable and should be everevolving. It is clear that the postmodernist act of borrowing and rehashing influences and points of inspiration is something that is still very much common practice. That creatives search for something new by sifting through, and piecing together the old. According to Venturi (1972) even Modernist thinkers drew influence from elsewhere, with ‘Le Corbusier’s (love for) grain elevators and steamships’, and Mies’ refinements of ‘American factories’ and ‘concrete buildings’ within his designs. Jencks has referred to the period of the last 20 years as ‘The Age of Lost Innocence’, claiming it rings true to ‘the age of branding where politicians and media routinely spin the truth’ – reinforcing the idea that postmodernism is simply a reaction against the sugarcoated version of events the public are often presented with. This postmodernist shift in tone that no longer views the state of things as being idyllic or utopian, is met with a defiant sort of humour as Jencks states that in order to confront this cynical truth it must be ‘consumed with a strong dose of PM sarcasm’. Postmodernism has ultimately led us to embrace the hodgepodge of things that our visual and popular cultures have become, acknowledging that a sort of ‘saturation point’ has been reached, and so influences and messages are often recycled. However this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as Jencks claims that postmodernism realises that meaning and understanding depend on ‘a negotiation between the past, present and future’ – an accumulation of everything.
Bibliography • Barrett, T. (1997) ' Modernism and Postmodernism: An Overview with Art Examples ' in Hutchens, J and Suggs, M. eds (1997) Art Education: Context and Practice in a Postmodern Era . NAEA: Washington. • Jencks, C. (2009) ' What Then is PostModernism? ' in Jencks, C. (2010) 'The PostModernism Reader' , Oxford: Wiley pp. 1437. • Venturi, R. (1972) 'Learning From Las Vegas' , Massachussetts: MIT Press. • Anorak Magazine. 2014. Draw Me Something: Ed Cheverton [online] Available at: <http://www.anorakmagazine.com/anorakblog/drawmesomethingedcheverton.html> (Accessed 29/01/16) • Design Museum. 2015. Memphis [online] Available at: <https://designmuseum.org/memphis/> (Accessed 25/01/16) • Fabulous Noble. 2015. Illustration: Then and Now [online] Available at: <https://www.fabulousnoble.com/news/feature_history_of_illustration> (Accessed 29/01/16) • National Gallery of Victoria. 2014. David Shrigley: Life and Life Drawing [online] Available at: <http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/media_release/davidshrigleylifeandlifedrawing/> (Accessed 26/01/16) • Tate Gallery. 2015. Postmodernism [online] Available at: <http://www.tate.org.uk/learn/onlineresources/glossary/p/postmodernism/> (Accessed 26/01/16) • Warhol.org. 2013. Aesthetics: Arthur Danto, Brillo Boxes image [online] Available at: <http://www.warhol.org/education/resourceslessons/AestheticsArthurDanto> (Accessed 27/01/16) • Postmodernism at the V&A. 2011 . directed by Federico Urdaneta. Available at: <https://vimeo.com/32207784> (Accessed 20/01/16)