An observation already made on Flickr this morning in regards to Dick Stone's work: its a good example of how, in spite of its literalism, you can begin to see the influence of fine art movements on the commercial artists of the 50's and 60's. This comment confirms my own feelings that there was a lot of cross-pollenation occuring during that time.
Perhaps that's one reason I find Dick Stone's work so exciting: he was clearly interested in pushing the boundaries just a little so that his work was still accessible to the traditional viewer, while at the same time giving one pause to consider, "just what the heck is going on here?" That, to me, is the mark of a real professional illustrator: engage as broad an audience as possible, be thought-provoking without alienating the viewer.
Cosmopolitan magazine AD, Robert C. Atherton, must have been quite impressed with Dick Stone as well. He made a point of showcasing the artist when his work debuted in the July 1954 issue of the magazine:
We'll take a look at those 'eerie illustrations' tomorrow. For now, a final thought on the nature of fine and commercial art from the artist himself. Asked who his main influences are, Stone says, "Derain, Monet, early Mondrian, Hopper, Soulage." And regarding his philosophy on art, he answers, "my philosophy, if you want to call it that, is in the painting, and then it’s up to the viewer. I detest the gibberish of “art speak”."
My Dick Stone Flickr set
Leif, off topic, but I have agreat shot of Barbara Bradley's portrait bust by Bob Walker. Would you like a copy? chuck
ReplyDeleteI had forgotten just how strong Stone was, What power in the marks, and control in the power. hard to do and control well. woof!
ReplyDelete