Roy Lichtenstein Comic List 8 8

[Randall Dowling]

On 12/4/2021 at 12:38 PM, Aman619 said:

one comment and Ill stop repeating myself.  ART is not measured by how "well drawn" it is.  His aim was NOT to paint the comic panels "better",

While I agree with this...

On 12/4/2021 at 12:38 PM, Aman619 said:

 just draw attention to them by size and style and seeing them in a gallery as ART

IMO, this is not even close to what makes great art.  By blowing up a comic panel and accentuating Ben-Day dots, there isn't some kind of revelation about how we perceive things or an exploration into the nuances and beauty of human expression or any other strong basis for artistic exploration.  I'm pretty sure that Roy knew that when he did so (he's hinted as much in early interviews).  I think he was looking for something that he could claim was original and started producing his comic canvases out of desperation.  And as most Pop Art and avant-gardism is filled with pretense, people just acted like they saw something more than there was.  And they've been doing to ever since.

To me, it's one of the best examples of the "Emperor's New Clothes" phenomena that has pervaded the art world ever since.  

[Aman619]

we comic collectors are few... He was speaking to the elite art buying/loving crowd.  To them comics were quaint child things, but now, so zuchmore in their eyes.  Back then we comes people were a joke.  Stan Lee used to say he was embarrassed to tell people at parties on Long Island (who had big jobs in the NYC) what he did for a living.

This was the time Lichtenstein was creating these canvases.

 

as for "pretense", sure he wanted a hook to make it big. (He wasn't an Alan Moore type for whom creating WAS the reward) 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Aman619

[chrisco37]

Nobody would even know Tony Abruzzo’s name if it wasn’t for RL.  Including those posting in this thread.  

I’ve been here for 20 years and seen countless threads of “best artists” “worst artists”, etc.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen his name on any of those lists or any list period.  Nary a mention.  
 

But an RL discussion comes up and he’s the “king of romance comic art”  and a “creative genius” whose brilliance was overshadowed by the thief, RL.

Gimme a break.  Hopefully you all can read this from way up there on your horses.

[kav]

On 12/4/2021 at 10:38 AM, Aman619 said:

one comment and Ill stop repeating myself.  ART is not measured by how "well drawn" it is.  His aim was NOT to paint the comic panels "better", just draw attention to them by size and style and seeing them in a gallery as ART not throwaway (BETTER DRAWN or not) objects of mass culture and consumerism. 

"Art" is measured by whatever the big heads in new york decide is art.  This can be a completely white canvas, a photo of a crucifix in a jar of urine, or a loogie on a piece of binder paper.

[kav]

back in da vinci's time there was no such word as art.  there were painters, sculptors, carpenters.  once the word art was invented it all went to **** then we had art schools as accurately depicted in the film Art School Confidential for example where **** was lauded and actual drawing vilified and mocked.

[Aman619]

On 12/4/2021 at 3:44 PM, kav said:

"Art" is measured by whatever the big heads in new york decide is art.  This can be a completely white canvas, a photo of a crucifix in a jar of urine, or a loogie on a piece of binder paper.

All bold artistic choices!  Lol

[Aman619]

On 12/4/2021 at 4:27 PM, kav said:

back in da vinci's time there was no such word as art.  there were painters, sculptors, carpenters.  once the word art was invented it all went to **** then we had art schools as accurately depicted in the film Art School Confidential for example where **** was lauded and actual drawing vilified and mocked.

Well, the growth of civilization has caused a lot of changes.  No longer do we all toil all day for bread. Artists painted to eat, same as laborers labored to eat. The vanity or piety of the rich caused all art to be commissioned back then. In 700 years, A leisure class developed beyond the monarch’s who were the art patrons back then.  People who had the riches to buy art.. but art painted or sculpted by poor artists promoted by art dealers in hopes of becoming as rich as the moneyed classes. You can’t compare then to now so easily. 

[kav]

On 12/4/2021 at 3:01 PM, Aman619 said:

Well, the growth of civilization has caused a lot of changes.  No longer do we all toil all day for bread. Artists painted to eat, same as laborers labored to eat. The vanity or piety of the rich caused all art to be commissioned back then. In 700 years, A leisure class developed beyond the monarch’s who were the art patrons back then.  People who had the riches to buy art.. but art painted or sculpted by poor artists promoted by art dealers in hopes of becoming as rich as the moneyed classes. You can’t compare then to now so easily. 

however the term 'art' meant whoever was in charge of what is or is not art could make a ton of money.  In da vinci's time, if you couldnt portray  stuff, only spit loogies, you made no cash.  Now its different.
See "Emperor's New Clothes".

[Aman619]

It’s ALL different now.  Why hang Lichtenstein for it. By the time he was born, it was what it is already, no? 

Edited December 5, 2021 by Aman619

[kav]

On 12/4/2021 at 4:36 PM, Aman619 said:

It’s ALL different now.  Why hang Lichtenstein for it. By the time he was born, it was what it is already, no? 

Lichtenstein was an artist.  Guys who spit on a piece of paper-not so much.

[Aman619]

On 12/4/2021 at 8:49 PM, kav said:

Lichtenstein was an artist.  Guys who spit on a piece of paper-not so much.

Absolutely.  
 

however…. When you think an out it…. Which do you think takes bigger belles?   Lol

all part of the progression.  Things get old and new ideas come into play. In the seventies, painting was considered dead.  It had all been done was espoused in art schools. That’s when this kind of performance art began getting traction. Think Blockchain currencies (trying to) supplant old monies. There will be well heeled adherents for every new crazy thing people can try to get in on early and make a buck on 

[oldmilwaukee6er]

Crying Girl 1964 is part of the Milwaukee Art Museum's collection. 

from Secret Hearts, no. 88 (June 1963)

Edited December 5, 2021 by oldmilwaukee6er

[aokartman]

My Image Composite Editor created this weird panorama mash-up piece once that I saved just for fun.  Romita/Giacoia.  David

[10centcomics]

On 11/24/2021 at 10:52 PM, kazoo said:

Appreciate the info, have been trying to put together a complete list as well.  There are way more of these than most people are aware of, ol' Roy seems to have found dipping into funny books really percolated the inspirado ...

I think I can add

Strange Suspense Stories #72 ("Brushstrokes 1")

I also have Our Fighting Forces #66 on my list but don't own the book and don't know what painting it is supposed to have "inspired", so not sure if that is a real one or not?

Grrrrrrrrrrr!! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grrrrrrrrrrr!! & https://www.imageduplicator.com/main.php?decade=60&year=65&work_id=376 ) and Live Ammo (Take Cover!) (https://www.imageduplicator.com/main.php?decade=60&year=62&work_id=99) are taken from Our Fighting Forces #66. 

The closest thing to a "master list" that I know of is from this site: https://www.imageduplicator.com/main.php

It's clunky to navigate but you can select a decade, then a year, and then a specific Lichtenstein work to see where the source panel came from. 

[10centcomics]

On 11/24/2021 at 9:43 PM, szav said:

So....it took me a lot of digging through GCD, comic book plus etc. to find out which books were which, and even after a few years its been pretty tough finding these in decent shape.

The big four, and the only ones with an OPG citation thus far that im aware of are Secret Hearts 83 (which is the source for Drowning Girl and Hopeless) and Girls' Romances 105 (source for Sleeping Girl), also All American Men of War 89 and 90.

To me the next Biggest one is the source for the $100,000,000.00+ Masterpiece which is Young Romances V15#2, also the source for I Know How You Must Feel Brad.  This one has a pretty awful cover imo but its all about the panels.

 

Thanks for sharing this one. The source comic for Masterpiece and I Know How You Must Feel, Brad weren't listed on the Image Duplicator site I shared on my previous post. 

[kav]

On 12/5/2021 at 6:21 AM, oldmilwaukee6er said:

Crying Girl 1964 is part of the Milwaukee Art Museum's collection. 

from Secret Hearts, no. 88 (June 1963)

 

Those ben gay dots are not easy to do either aks @Artboy99.

[chrisco37]

On 12/5/2021 at 7:18 PM, kav said:

Those ben gay dots are not easy to do either aks @Artboy99.

Bah!   He just copied/stole from the 4 color printing process.  Such a hack.

[kav]

On 12/5/2021 at 5:38 PM, chrisco37 said:

Bah!   He just copied/stole from the 4 color printing process.  Such a hack.

Try to paint a bunch of exact circles with acrylic, perfectly flat.  Hell try to do just one.

[chrisco37]

On 12/5/2021 at 8:39 PM, kav said:

Try to paint a bunch of exact circles with acrylic, perfectly flat.  Hell try to do just one.

  i was being facetious

[kav]

On 12/5/2021 at 5:43 PM, chrisco37 said:

  i was being facetious

You got me that time!