DUSK LATTITUDES

Thinking about Swamp Thing.

W.H.Y.S.

Thinking about tattoos.

EYES, PT.2

From Luke Dixon's portfolio.

Says Luke: "I leave the eyes to clear to take away some personality from the image - opens it up for more interpretation..."

Hmm. Confession: most of my cartoons feature eyeless characters. I began drawing this way after becoming frustrated with poorly drawn eyes on otherwise well-drawn characters. And internally, the initial reaction was positive ~ the characters no longer looked so clearly amateur (although they did take on a zombie-esque quality) and I saved good time + energy overall. However, while it theoretically helped my cartoons, it did nothing for my ability to draw eyes.

While I do sympathize with Dixon's defense, it's not satisfying. 'Opening up' something for 'interpretation' is too often euphemism for laziness on the part of the artist, who is well aware that the eyes carry much of a character's emotion and an awkwardly drawn gaze can and will drag a cartoon into purgatorial mediocrity. Leave eyes blank, however, and the reader will approximately place the eyes where they ought to be. The drawing meanwhile gains a quasi-intellectual, haunting quality ~ albeit cheaply earned ~ and the artist takes credit for what many might call edginess.

It seems like guilty artists should ditch the practice, and all admiration for those who employ it. But, not so fast...like a musician seeking to become a one-man band, where it might be beneficial to use a drum machine while mastering the guitar, an artist mastering other elements could justify empty eyes. Not to say I've mastered every area but eyes (legs come to mind) or that eyelessness isn't a glaring shortcut, but at the moment I truly do not mind, and like how it looks on my cartoons and the comics of others. Though certainly I do imagine that as I become a stronger artist that eye detail will evolve into and within all my artwork, for the time being I enjoy Luke Dixon and the Empty Gaze.