[bearsclover]

quote

Quote:

the more I look at all the art books out there and get better at drawing, the more I realise how much that hogarth crap messed me up...

I saw your art on your web site, Rinaldo. It was excellent. I don't see how you've been so "messed up"!

quote

Quote:

and I was pretty careful not to take much of it to heart.

Well, that's always good advice. I did that even in Hogarth's class, and I'm a big fan of his. It isn't as if I think any teacher is always 100% right (for me, at least). Nobody should think that.

quote

Quote:

instructional books on the whole are very dangerious.

Aren't you being a bit melodramatic? You make it sound as if each art instruction book should have a warning label on it, like they do on cans of ant spray!

quote

Quote:

everyone works differently and you really do have to find your own way.

Well, yeah. Obviously. But unless you intend to seek no instruction whatsoever (either from books, or from school) you are bound to influenced by other people. It's up to you to decide how much of it to integrate into your own style.

[Rinaldo]

[rant]

I think Hogarth's books are some of the worst out there. absolutly aviod them. his whole aproach is wrong IMO. it is globaly bad advice, and to get into that kind of hogarth mind set...so many gospel rules and vain attempts to classify and clarify a bunch of guidlines to follow for anatomy and all the rest.
it doesn't matter that he was way off the mark in a great deal of what he wrote. the idea behind his books is counter productive. the worst example of a "how to" book, that seems to be given a lot of credit and reccomendation.
the more I look at all the art books out there and get better at drawing, the more I realise how much that hogarth crap messed me up...and I was pretty careful not to take much of it to heart.
instructional books on the whole are very dangerious. everyone works differently and you really do have to find your own way.

I don't mind loomis and Hamm tho. they seem much more down to earth. hamm has helped me a great deal..and I rarely have to unlearn/BS filter his info.

[/rant]

[ July 01, 2002: Message edited by: Rinaldo ]

[Dr. Bang]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rinaldo:
[rant]

I think Hogarth's books are some of the worst out there. absolutly aviod them. his whole aproach is wrong IMO. it is globaly bad advice, and to get into that kind of hogarth mind set...so many gospel rules and vain attempts to classify and clarify a bunch of guidlines to follow for anatomy and all the rest.
it doesn't matter that he was way off the mark in a great deal of what he wrote. the idea behind his books is counter productive. the worst example of a "how to" book, that seems to be given a lot of credit and reccomendation.
the more I look at all the art books out there and get better at drawing, the more I realise how much that hogarth crap messed me up...and I was pretty careful no to take much of it to heart.
instructional books on the whole are very dangerious. everyone works differently and you really do have to find your own way.

I don't loomis and Hamm tho. they seem much more down to earth. hamm has helped me a great deal..and I rarely have to unlearn/BS filter his info.

[/rant]

---

woah! Can you PLEASE go into more details about how it harmed you? I'm really interested to know cause i'm about to buy that book. Thanks

[Rinaldo]

Bang- sure....although it is stuff that relates me personaly.
like I said above...mostly the idea that there are rules and sequences to follow, he is very verbose and overly complicated...confusing.
I think when you are drawing....if you want to take on information from teachers it has to become ingrained in your subconscious to some degree to be of use...you don't think about stuff when you draw, you just do it, so once you do take somthing on it's not easy to just forget it and move on all the time. And it's hard to find out how something works until you start playing around with it.
when you are starting out you have nothing to base your skill on, it's a mad scrable to make sense of a huge number of variables. anything you learn at that point which is not solid, will harm you. and I mean it has to be solid...not in being more or less a correct rule (that is of no real help at all)...but in being a solid way of thinking about what you are doing. hogarth has rules which are wrong...he dictates and preches. There is only talk of right and wrong. that just messed me up. becasue I look for rules and absolutes....a mistake I am starting to realise.
Have you read any of the hogarth books??? I have them all. seriously I have no idea what the guy was on, but 90% of the stuff written makes no sense. just anal banter that no begginer would understand. It gives off all the wrong messages. makes you think you are not understnading things. very impersonal.
There is a lot of stuff in there about the better way of doing stuff like figure construction, the correct way.
The big problem is however that the majority of the images he has in there are just plain bad...anatomy is off here and there. he is one of the best examples of a style that took over an artist. the more I look at it the more I find it blocked and cumbersome.
As to specificaly how it F**ked me up...like I said before most of the stuff in that book is bad advice if you really want to get anywhere. I just went along with the idea that there were rules...even tho i realised that hogarth was wrong in some of them...I missed a few..and ended up rather confused. again no solid base. nothing I could depend on. nothing that let me change my path and understand how and why the rules I had been given were there....it is all how...no why. the sort of thing that begginers love and flock to....someone saying "this is how you do it". and he lied to me. utterly. he drawings were not anatomicaly correct. it just causes confusion. and even if there is a bit there...when you try to build on confusion...it mulitplies and gets worse, becomes more ingrained.
so as a book to have early on, dynamic figure drawing and all the rest are criminal.....as to picking it up after you have a solid base to work from..and the ability to filter that crap with precision. why bother??? I'd say 20% of it (on a wild and arrogant guess) is of worth. that is just in the figure drawing one. all the other books....besides maybe the drapery one (Still very suspect) are a waste of time IM(not so very)HO.
if you want to learn basic structure...go bridgman. I can't really see any other reason to have the hogarth books. honestly.

bearsclover- "I saw your art on your web site, Rinaldo. It was excellent. I don't see how you've been so "messed up" thanks=) it is a very personal and complicated thing. more about trying to learn new things and change direction. I come to a point where I have stuff that is dragging me down, making it harder than it should be to have fun and so what I want to do.
I'm not saying hogarth is the sole cause of my problems. but I would have been much better off without his books at the time.

and yes I am saying that art instruction books should have a label on them... most do to some extent. Loomis is rather humble. he never talks down to you and always engourges you. it's much more in the spirit of education. there is mention that the information held within is not gospel truth.
There is always a danger in letting someone else teach you. education is not about just blindly preaching rules and "this is how I do it" it's about setting you up to be your own teacher. making someone understand what it is they are doing, and why. and that cannot be done simply....maybe not in a book at all. Idunno.

I don't think I am making myself clear on the "find your own way" thing...maybe It is not something that works with words.
I am saying that everyones brain works differently.
I look at lots of different artists...all doing fantastic work and breaking each other's rules all over the place. it's very subjective. trying to chart a critical path for "how to learn to draw" is silly. everyone learns fastest when they are interested. and while I agree that the "you gotta learn the rules b4 you break them" is a good guide...it's still a silly rule in itself. there are good artists and bad, and I really don't think any kind of critical path is gonna change that much. you gotta learn new stuff all the time, every day. and it's gotta be stuff you are interested in.
different people will start off and get into different things. tread a different path. but still make good looking art in the end.
there are suggested paths I suppose that have been proven to work, but IMHO they are not as important as having fun while drawing and doing what makes you happy. there are points when you gotta practice boring stuff to get better at something...but if you are into it at the time...it's not so boring really.
gah...words never work=) I'll shut up.

hope that makes some kind of sense. (and of course it's just MHO)

[James Bradford]

Hogarth was an amazing artist, and for him to put a book at with his approaches to how he draws is a very nice gift to us all. When taking up his books, I am not looking to take his style, or learn everything from his. His subject matter is very stylized and doesn't come life. However, there is something to learn from him. An element to take into your own and interpret your own way. This can be different for anyone, but to be so black and white and say "Never touch a Hogarth book" is very wrong in my opnion - there are plenty of gray areas when learning from other artist through their methods. Just my 2 cents.

[James Bradford]

Rinaldo I just read your 2nd post. I agree with you that Hogarth is not a good book for the basis of someone who is just beggining to learn anatomy. He doesn't draw his images from life and his perception of his methods are based around that. But like I said before there is an element to which you can get from him, something small, or great - it varies. But thanks for sharing your opinion it gave me a new look to Hogarth in a way.