Quote:
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
Tolkien's artwork doesn't belong to the realistic tradition but to the Arts and Craft Movement. Think of the Pre-Raphaelite artists.
|
I'm thinking, but nope, there's nothing there.
Quote:
|
So, for me, I rather like the quirkiness of his drawings. His Smaug captures Smaug's lust for his hoard and that's all that matters there, in my opinion. And there's a primitiveness to his Glorund that is quite anthropologically intriguing as I see it even though the drawing isn't in perspective.
|
Anthropologically intriguing as it may be it helps me little, doesn't it? Thanks though,
Galin, I appreciate it!
You are right though, of course. One might indeed appreciate Tolkien as an illustrator, and you make a good point out of it too. Sort of, this is the kind of pictures you would find on the authentic (but fictional) Red Book. But I must say, looking at that Smaug picture I'm quite certain that Tolkien didn't intend to loose all sense of perspective, trying to be a good Pre-Rafaelite, he simply didn't know any better, which is my point about Tolkien the illustrator I suppose. He was a great writer and also a pretty decent illustrator. But if he never wrote any books, he probably wouldn't be able to support himself as an illustrator.