Nostalgia vs. Craft in Original Art 0

[delekkerste]

I've had a LOT of discussions with friends and fellow collectors recently about the whole "nostalgia vs. craft" debate in the original art hobby, as it seems that, at least as far as market values go, "nostalgia" has been far outpacing "craft".  Memorable/nostalgic art tied to mainstream super-heroes has been far outpacing price appreciation from art related to licensed properties (e.g., Conan) and non-character specific genre art (e.g., EC sci-fi, horror, fantasy, western, war, etc.)  Now, granted, there are exceptions (John Buscema Conan has been doing well, though, I would argue that is due in large part from his being associated as a major artist on Marvel's own properties, and, of course, Frazetta is his own market).

Now, I know some will say, who cares what the market thinks, I like what I like.  But, it's not like prices go up and down in a vacuum - I fear that, over time, we're losing people who truly "get" and appreciate the artists who are more associated with craft than a particular top-tier Marvel or DC character.  I'm talking about the likes of The Studio artists (BWS, Jones, Kaluta, Wrightson), many of the EC artists (e.g., Wood, Craig, Ingels, etc.), a number of prominent strip artists, etc.  I'm pretty sure BWS Conan prices have been down or flat the past few years, even as top-tier superhero art has ratcheted higher again; it seems as though the "hottest" BWS art is his Marvel work from the '80s and early '90s when he - yep, you guessed it - worked on mainstream Marvel characters (most BWS aficionados would not call this his finest work, even though it was still quite good). 

I sadly anticipated that the Wood Weird Science cover would only get one bid at the reserve price in the Heritage auction last week.  And we're talking about one of the few good EC Wood sci-fi covers not in a black hole collection!  Where are the buyers?  Where is the next generation?  Sadly, I feel that, when younger collectors talk about art world "rebels", they're not talking about iconoclasts like The Studio artists (I bet most under-45s would struggle even to name a piece of art by Kaluta or Jones), they're talking about the early '90s Image Revolution and artists like McFarlane and Lee.  When they talk about craft, they're probably talking about Sean Murphy instead of Bernie Wrightson.  

Where's it all going??  I'm interested both from a market perspective and from a collector/aficionado perspective.  I think the OA hobby is going to be a poorer place as a lot of the old guard, with their vast troves of knowledge and appreciation for craft (which, again, seems to be getting marginalized) fades away.  

Feel free to post thoughts on any aspect of this issue below.  

Edited August 8, 2018 by delekkerste

[PhilipB2k17]

24 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

I've had a LOT of discussions with friends and fellow collectors recently about the whole "nostalgia vs. craft" debate in the original art hobby, as it seems that, at least as far as market values go, "nostalgia" has been far outpacing "craft".  Memorable/nostalgic art tied to mainstream super-heroes has been far outpacing price appreciation from art related to licensed properties (e.g., Conan) and non-character specific genre art (e.g., EC sci-fi, horror, fantasy).  Now, granted, there are exceptions (John Buscema Conan has been doing well, though, I would argue that is due in large part from his being associated as a major artist on Marvel's own properties, and, of course, Frazetta is his own market).

Now, I know some will say, who cares what the market thinks, I like what I like.  But, it's not like prices go up and down in a vacuum - I fear that, over time, we're losing people who truly "get" and appreciate the artists who are more associated with craft than a particular top-tier Marvel or DC character.  I'm talking about the likes of The Studio artists (BWS, Jones, Kaluta, Wrightson) and many of the EC artists (e.g., Wood, Craig, Ingels, etc.)  I'm pretty sure BWS Conan prices have been down or flat the past few years, even as top-tier superhero art has ratcheted higher again; it seems as though the "hottest" BWS art is his Marvel work from the '80s and early '90s when he - yep, you guessed it - worked on mainstream Marvel characters.  

I sadly anticipated that the Wood Weird Science cover would only get one bid at the reserve price in the Heritage auction last week.  And we're talking about one of the few good EC Wood sci-fi covers not in a black hole collection!  Where are the buyers?  Where is the next generation?  Sadly, I feel that, when younger collectors talk about art world "rebels", they're not talking about iconoclasts like The Studio artists (I bet most under-45s would struggle even to name a piece of art by Kaluta or Jones), they're talking about the early '90s Image Revolution and artists like McFarlane and Lee.  When they talk about craft, they're probably talking about Sean Murphy instead of Bernie Wrightson.  

Where's it all going??  I'm interested both from a market perspective and from a collector/aficionado perspective.  I think the OA hobby is going to be a poorer place as a lot of the old guard, with their vast troves of knowledge and appreciation for craft (which, again, seems to be getting marginalized) fades away.  

Feel free to post thoughts on any aspect of this issue below.  

I think it's hit and miss. Jim Starlin, for example, is becoming a superstar with younger collectors due to his influence on the MCU. Kirby is Kirby. Ditko is Ditko. I think all collectors get that. I think it is the DC artists who are going to suffer somewhat. I think Neal Adams is going to see his stuff wane over time, because he isn't putting out a lot of new, exciting product, and his influence in the hobby is not as well-appreciated with younger collectors. His art (especially his 60's and early 70's DC stuff and his X-Men stuff at Marvel), was terrific. But his (then) "revolutionary" art style isn't so revolutionary to modern collectors who don't realize how influential he was, and how so may artists who followed him are aping a lot of his technique.

Frank Miller is going to continue to be important, I think. But, will Dave Stevens? He's aesthetically brilliant, and good girl art is always going to command somewhat of a premium (and he's an absolute master of it), but unless Rocketeer gets rebooted and becomes a huge pop culture thing, his art may sink into the morass of the Turners, Adam Hughes', J Scott Campbell "good girl" artists who he inspired and influenced. Younger collectors may not get how influential he was ( a la Neal Adams). Once the collector base who saw Stevens' stuff for the first time, and were wowed by it, are no longer driving the hobby, will he still be commanding the premiums he commands now? 

I kind of think the great EC covers by Wood, Feldstein, etc will always do well. They are so classic and iconic. But the interiors, not so much.

Wrightson is a difficult question. I think his Frankenstein work, alone, will elevate him above guys like Wood, Jones, Kaluta, etc. It is recognized as the pinnacle of the art form, and just seeing it takes your breath away. There's nothing like it, really. 

Edited August 8, 2018 by PhilipB2k17

[Panelfan1]

The question I would have regarding your (@delekkerste) initial argument that I would love for you to clear up is - are you saying that craft only exists outside of super hero art? Because there are a ton of talented artists who have and who still are working on superhero art.  These artists bring a high level of craft to their work -it's simply that it was applied to characters in costume. Jim Lee for example has pretty much only done superhero art -and I think he is awesome at it.

Now to answer the question - you are correct - Nostalgia trumps craft by a wide margin.   Having said that - Craft distinguishes various art within that. So for example - in any given hero title (say spiderman, superman etc..) certain artists come on top in popularity and demand.  That is in part due to their style/craft.  At the same time - many collectors are not that sophisticated when it comes to drawing,anatomy, etc..  For them, nostalgia is probably the biggest factor.

As a collector of both comic art and vintage magazine illustration art - I find that there is tremendous craft in the vintage art I collect -but not a lot of demand -as it is not tied to any nostalgia.

 

[delekkerste]

4 minutes ago, Panelfan1 said:

The question I would have regarding your (@delekkerste) initial argument that I would love for you to clear up is - are you saying that craft only exists outside of super hero art?

No, definitely not saying that. 

[FlexMentallo]

Good point about nostalgia trumping craft.  This isn't fine art (yet) and the injection of nostalgia differentiates it from such, thus market prices will always have that shadow at play influencing desirability as a collectible rather than objectively viewing a work of art for art's sake on its on its own merits.  And that is OK but it detracts perhaps from wider respectability within the art community (not that we care).

Now your actual point that the newer collector's care less about craft or the history of comic art..  guess I don't know enough collector's out there to say for certain.  One the one hand we have more information available to us that explains the history through books, internet etc.  and on the other you don't see a whole lot of conversation about older artists and their contributions on comic book forums.  In the end given the shrinkage of the comic book hobby in general I imagine the circle of the dedicated few who take a serious look at craft shrinks as well.  

[JadeGiant]

39 minutes ago, Panelfan1 said:

The question I would have regarding your (@delekkerste) initial argument that I would love for you to clear up is - are you saying that craft only exists outside of super hero art? .

 

 

33 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

No, definitely not saying that. 

How are we defining "craft" in this discussion? I get nostalgia but not sure I am following what/how craft is being defined so I am stuck here as well. What exactly are we comparing? 

[comix4fun]

What if it's all just junk and we've created our appreciation and our perceived importance of the work, along the values attached, out of a desperate yearning to fill the existential void tugging at our psyches?

What if nostalgia is nothing but a futile attempt to anchor ourselves to the past as we hurtle towards the abyss that is all of our futures? 

What if they are all just "Bulbous Head Cowboy Stance Fake Captain America's"? 

Spoiler

 

[PhilipB2k17]

5 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

What if it's all just junk and we've created our appreciation and our perceived importance of the work, along the values attached, out of a desperate yearning to fill the existential void tugging at our psyches?

What if nostalgia is nothing but a futile attempt to anchor ourselves to the past as we hurtle towards the abyss that is all of our futures? 

What if they are all just "Bulbous Head Cowboy Stance Fake Captain America's"? 

  Hide contents

 

[suspense39]

2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I've had a LOT of discussions with friends and fellow collectors recently about the whole "nostalgia vs. craft" debate in the original art hobby, as it seems that, at least as far as market values go, "nostalgia" has been far outpacing "craft".  Memorable/nostalgic art tied to mainstream super-heroes has been far outpacing price appreciation from art related to licensed properties (e.g., Conan) and non-character specific genre art (e.g., EC sci-fi, horror, fantasy).  Now, granted, there are exceptions (John Buscema Conan has been doing well, though, I would argue that is due in large part from his being associated as a major artist on Marvel's own properties, and, of course, Frazetta is his own market).

Now, I know some will say, who cares what the market thinks, I like what I like.  But, it's not like prices go up and down in a vacuum - I fear that, over time, we're losing people who truly "get" and appreciate the artists who are more associated with craft than a particular top-tier Marvel or DC character.  I'm talking about the likes of The Studio artists (BWS, Jones, Kaluta, Wrightson), many of the EC artists (e.g., Wood, Craig, Ingels, etc.), a number of prominent strip artists, etc.  I'm pretty sure BWS Conan prices have been down or flat the past few years, even as top-tier superhero art has ratcheted higher again; it seems as though the "hottest" BWS art is his Marvel work from the '80s and early '90s when he - yep, you guessed it - worked on mainstream Marvel characters.  

I sadly anticipated that the Wood Weird Science cover would only get one bid at the reserve price in the Heritage auction last week.  And we're talking about one of the few good EC Wood sci-fi covers not in a black hole collection!  Where are the buyers?  Where is the next generation?  Sadly, I feel that, when younger collectors talk about art world "rebels", they're not talking about iconoclasts like The Studio artists (I bet most under-45s would struggle even to name a piece of art by Kaluta or Jones), they're talking about the early '90s Image Revolution and artists like McFarlane and Lee.  When they talk about craft, they're probably talking about Sean Murphy instead of Bernie Wrightson.  

Where's it all going??  I'm interested both from a market perspective and from a collector/aficionado perspective.  I think the OA hobby is going to be a poorer place as a lot of the old guard, with their vast troves of knowledge and appreciation for craft (which, again, seems to be getting marginalized) fades away.  

Feel free to post thoughts on any aspect of this issue below.  

I have these same questions myself....it actually makes me bang my head on the wall!  

[Andahaion]

I think the future for this niche sector of the greater art world is brighter than many on this forum believe it to be.  Pay attention to that last sentence..."art world".  I believe that as time goes by (and I think we're seeing it come to maturity/fruition today), more interest, more acceptance, more appreciation and education about this art form will occur.  I am a fine art collector first, and if I could do it over again I would have been a fine art history major.  That said, I draw frequent parallels and tap into my art history knowledge as it may or may not be applicable to the comic book genre.  So what if the greater public at large is ignorant about who Barry Windsor-Smith is?  How many people know who George Inness is...?  I could name many, many artists who very few people know about whose work commands healthy respect as well as results at auction.  And don't forget that life is cyclical.  When Monet tried to gift his great landscapes currently housed in the l'Orangerie in Paris, the state didn't want them.  Can you imagine (using our perspective today)?  They erected walls in front of the paintings for other exhibits.  Unreal, but I really do feel that the Kirbys and Windsor-Smiths of this world will live on and become appreciated for the artists they are. 

I also think that at this moment in time, the comic world's hegemony (for lack of a better word) over our current cultural landscape cannot be discounted too much.  They just created a new category for the Oscars to, presumably, award achievement in popular culture movies.  And there's the continued strong auction results that this very board cries out in disbelief after every auction...and the Lucas museum...and the growing interest among the world's top museums for this stuff.  I just posted a lecture a few weeks ago talking about these very issues, and I don't think any one of you commented or ever gave it a look.  These conversations are under way and ongoing and I just don't really see a compelling reason to be short on this medium, at least with regard to the really good stuff.  Though, I fully appreciate the perspective from you veterans.

Hope that makes sense, I'm drafting this between meetings, so please excuse typos/errors in context, but wanted to chime in with my perspective as a fairly newcomer to OA, but certainly an art lover.

[aardvark88]

2 hours ago, JadeGiant said:

 

How are we defining "craft" in this discussion? I get nostalgia but not sure I am following what/how craft is being defined. 

By 'craft,' I think it is being defined as technical drawing and inking skills of say EC illustrators (e.g. cross-hatching, above average layouts: Spirit) vs nostalgia OA from period when we grew up say 1970s up depending on one's age bracket.

[JadeGiant]

10 minutes ago, aardvark88 said:

By 'craft,' I think it is being defined as technical drawing and inking skills of say EC illustrators (e.g. cross-hatching, above average layouts: Spirit) vs nostalgia OA from period when we grew up say 1970s up depending on one's age bracket.

Thanks, this helps. 

 

Let's see some good examples of craft art to drive this point home

[aardvark88]

4 minutes ago, JadeGiant said:

Let's see some good examples of craft art to drive this point home

EC 'craft' OA examples would include Ghastly Graham Ingles cross-hatching on most of his horror art. Feldstein's railway or subway layouts from EC Impact #1 later 'borrowed' by Frank Miller on DD origin retold issue. Any Will Eisner Spirit section for trendsetting splash page layout especially on title page blending in the word  "Spirit."  

[suspense39]

I think part of the question is HISTORY, and how one sees it in relation the the art form. I personally look at it starting from the turn of the century newspaper comics and the evolution from there to comic books, and the evolution within that chronologically heroes (golden age), to EC, to underground, to alternative etc.; it's really hard to define craft of any art form without knowledge of it's history......maybe part of what is going on is collectors have different ideas of history, say, starting from when they began reading comics to now and don't really care about the rest.....I really don't know. 

[Timely]

I believe, if the character is relevant, so is the art.

Basically no collector out there remembers buying Action Comics #15 off the newsstand, but look how much that cover sold for, $286,000.  No one had " nostalgia" for that. 

On the opposite side of that coin, a Nyoka page from Master Comics #114 sold for $64. No one had " nostalgia" for that one either.

Nostalgia is a huge factor for many who buy art, but obviously it is not the only factor.

Superman is relevant, Nyoka... not so much!

Edited August 8, 2018 by Timely

[JadeGiant]

27 minutes ago, Timely said:

I believe, if the character is relevant, so is the art.

Basically no collector out there remembers buying Action Comics #15 off the newsstand, but look how much that cover sold for, $286,000.  No one had " nostalgia" for that. 

On the opposite side of that coin, a Nyoka page from Master Comics #114 sold for $64. No one had " nostalgia" for that one either.

Nostalgia is a huge factor for many who buy art, but obviously it is not the only factor.

Superman is relevant, Nyoka... not so much!

For sure. Nostalgia is a strong factor in what I collect but appreciation of art is just as big for me. The most nostalgic pieces of art are usually not available or cost prohibitive. I can often scratch the nostalgic itch by collecting newer art of a character or artist that aligns with my nostalgia.

[artcollector9]

Excellent topic Gene. You and I have had this conversation in private. Happy to make some public comments as well. 

Nostalgia is outpacing craft tremendously. In the old days, for example, collectors tended to buy artists first and image second. If I told a collector I had a Frazetta drawing for sale as I pulled it out of my portfolio, if it was priced right, it would be sold. People bought on the name. Today, I see the market much more image driven and as most of the old timers have died, the so called second tier artists have gained ground on A titles (i.e. Ayers Spider-Man page now costs a respectable sum). 

These days the Studio artists, whom I love and admire, are losing ground, except on the works that are mainstream (i.e. Swamp Thing or BWS Wolverine). At one time I could sell a Romantic styled drawing by Jones or Kaluta or BWS pretty easily. Not so much today. 

I think partly it is prices. When things were cheap, collectors could collect wide, and we wanted it all. Today, with each piece costing so much, decisions have to be made- so that while most collectors can admire a $50,000early Hal Foster Tarzan, few (under 50?) are willing to pull the trigger, optioning instead for a DKR or Kirby/Sinnott twice up page. 

Tastes change and tastes are moving away from pretty, ornate, decorative art. The illustrative art of yesterday is giving way to more modern looking art. Yes there are plenty of exceptions-- Herriman's KK for one, continues to look timeless and modern even though it was crafted 80 years ago. 

 I remember when collectors would discuss the craft of the art associated with a page-- Wood, Williamson, Frazetta, The Studio, that type of stuff. I think there are certainly artists that create beautiful and valuable art today, i.e. Williams and Lee. But the monetary value, if not the aesthetic value, drops off tremendously once the art is not mainstream known hero art. 

Look at Ditko-- Spider Man or Dr Strange-- more valuable than gold. His Charlton art? tremendous drop off. Recent art? Unsellable. That wasn't so with artists that were bought on craft, so much. That's changed today. 

also- I can't afford to buy art just for the heck of it-- the money I spend has to be invested wisely so that I can give this money back to my family one day. 

Dealers and auction houses are selling us investments-- let there be no question about that. Once we go above $500, it's an investment. 

It's interesting to note that as far as investment goes, art that has beautiful craft will be investment worthy-- if it is of a super hero. A Wally Wood Daredevil page has more upside today than one of his Sci Fi pages. The opposite was true years ago, I think. 

 

Edited August 8, 2018 by artcollector9

[suspense39]

this post above made me think of another observation, Well rendered does not always equate to well crafted, Herriman was an amazing craftsman even though he doesn't have the rendering ability of someone like someone like Wrightson

[The Voord]

5 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I've had a LOT of discussions with friends and fellow collectors recently about the whole "nostalgia vs. craft" debate in the original art hobby, as it seems that, at least as far as market values go, "nostalgia" has been far outpacing "craft".  Memorable/nostalgic art tied to mainstream super-heroes has been far outpacing price appreciation from art related to licensed properties (e.g., Conan) and non-character specific genre art (e.g., EC sci-fi, horror, fantasy, western, war, etc.)  Now, granted, there are exceptions (John Buscema Conan has been doing well, though, I would argue that is due in large part from his being associated as a major artist on Marvel's own properties, and, of course, Frazetta is his own market).

Now, I know some will say, who cares what the market thinks, I like what I like.  But, it's not like prices go up and down in a vacuum - I fear that, over time, we're losing people who truly "get" and appreciate the artists who are more associated with craft than a particular top-tier Marvel or DC character.  I'm talking about the likes of The Studio artists (BWS, Jones, Kaluta, Wrightson), many of the EC artists (e.g., Wood, Craig, Ingels, etc.), a number of prominent strip artists, etc.  I'm pretty sure BWS Conan prices have been down or flat the past few years, even as top-tier superhero art has ratcheted higher again; it seems as though the "hottest" BWS art is his Marvel work from the '80s and early '90s when he - yep, you guessed it - worked on mainstream Marvel characters (most BWS aficionados would not call this his finest work, even though it was still quite good). 

I sadly anticipated that the Wood Weird Science cover would only get one bid at the reserve price in the Heritage auction last week.  And we're talking about one of the few good EC Wood sci-fi covers not in a black hole collection!  Where are the buyers?  Where is the next generation?  Sadly, I feel that, when younger collectors talk about art world "rebels", they're not talking about iconoclasts like The Studio artists (I bet most under-45s would struggle even to name a piece of art by Kaluta or Jones), they're talking about the early '90s Image Revolution and artists like McFarlane and Lee.  When they talk about craft, they're probably talking about Sean Murphy instead of Bernie Wrightson.  

Where's it all going??  I'm interested both from a market perspective and from a collector/aficionado perspective.  I think the OA hobby is going to be a poorer place as a lot of the old guard, with their vast troves of knowledge and appreciation for craft (which, again, seems to be getting marginalized) fades away.  

Feel free to post thoughts on any aspect of this issue below.  

Fair post, Gene, I think what you're saying is well worth considering and responding to.  Unfortunately, right now, I've been out socializing with friends - so perhaps at this moment in time it's not the best time to reply with a reasoned response (which will only be a drunken reply).  I'll chime-in with my thoughts tomorrow, when I'm sober (hic!) . . . 

[Mercurious]

Greetings,

Young dumbhead millennial collector here.  I generally collect mostly based off of character / title / overall aesthetics of the piece.  I factor in the artist only really when determining the value of the piece, a desire to buy that particular artist hardly ever figures into the equation.  Like I said, dumbhead.  But I'm pretty convinced there's a lot more people like me in the next wave of collectors.