ben shahn

There's been a big debate happening on a few blogs right now about Ben Shahn, a Social Realist painter who gained notoriety as a fine artist in the 30s and as a commercial illustrator in the 60s. Some say Shahn spawned a generation of bad artists today that hide behind a history of faux naïve art, while others claim that they can certainly draw "good" if they want - but they choose this childlike effect because it interests them personally.

Personally, I'm a little torn. Certainly, anyone who says that Shahn was no artist and couldn't draw worth an ice cream sandwich must be unable to see the amazing deliberate way Shahn could use a simple line to express weight and motion.. and also has never tried to draw like Shahn themselves. Sorry, Soccer Mom, but there's a good chance that your kid couldn't draw that - because there's an entire life of proper fine arts training behind these "crude" appearing lines.

">

However I do grow slightly weary of artists from every era calling the faux naïve card who pick up this style without much training or experience. Folk art might draw from the "uneducated" with no background in the arts - but while it can appear similar to this style it's not the same. But! An illustrator who has diligently worked on their craft and has landed in this style will always catch my eye over an illustrator based more in realism.

Personally I feel that one must really explore their relationship with art and work through many stylistic phases before moving into the simplistic. It's a style that I would love to be able to claim someday, but I know I'm still working on it.

I'm still kind of torn on the whole subject, though! It's a pretty tricky one - what do you guys think?

my own little blatant Shahn rip-off from a few years ago, a portrait of Marlon Brando from "On the Waterfront".