That´s strange. Still, they don't look TOTALLY incompetent, at least the second sheet. I recall way worse in the past... I guess it wouldn´t be totally 100% impossible (but pretty close...) to believe that these are really loosey-goosey phone scribbles by barks, but they don`t look like ANYTHING I´ve seen by him, so I highly doubt it. (I can´t even remember seeing anything in felt tip pen by barks, everything seems to be nib pen, rapidograph or pencil, but that does´t mean that the man didn't whip out a felt tip once or twice in his life...) And the signature makes no sense at all. IF Barks sold them at some point, or gave them away as a gift, he would have signed them at THAT point, so why would even his signature be in this alien phone-scribble-ey-style... I´ve seen some strange (and sometimes really sad, in case of Frank King for example) later-period-shit by some artists but this just doesn´t make any sense at all. I can´t believe how many Barks fans and sometimes "scholars" get fooled by stuff like this (or worse) regularly. Makes me wonder how they look at the man´s stuff itself- if it looks the same to them... well, the "scholar" goes out the window, but you could still be a fan, only with not clue at all. I mean, Barks for sure had his bad days, but he never turned completely incompetent or into a totally different style... why am I thinking so hard about this? It´s so stupid, but baffling in a fascinating way... what do people SEE when they look at drawings and how far removed is it from the way I, or anyone else for that matter, sees it? If one draws himherself in any professional way, it can make you question everything. Oh, the horrors!
Even IF they were made by Barks (horrible thought), the commercial value ought to be very very low in my opinion. I think that Carl Barks original art is supposed to give an aesthetically positive impression, not the contrary...
Therefore I prefer the finished (especially comic book) art work by Barks, with the 1948-1949 period as the climax as far as the design of the Ducks is concerned.
Yes, I've seen that eh... "Jippes" piece. If you use the label "Forgeries"on the bottom of the post it will take you to several posts with really bad art. :-) http://sekvenskonst.blogspot.se/search/label/Forgeries
That´s strange. Still, they don't look TOTALLY incompetent, at least the second sheet. I recall way worse in the past... I guess it wouldn´t be totally 100% impossible (but pretty close...) to believe that these are really loosey-goosey phone scribbles by barks, but they don`t look like ANYTHING I´ve seen by him, so I highly doubt it. (I can´t even remember seeing anything in felt tip pen by barks, everything seems to be nib pen, rapidograph or pencil, but that does´t mean that the man didn't whip out a felt tip once or twice in his life...) And the signature makes no sense at all. IF Barks sold them at some point, or gave them away as a gift, he would have signed them at THAT point, so why would even his signature be in this alien phone-scribble-ey-style...
ReplyDeleteI´ve seen some strange (and sometimes really sad, in case of Frank King for example) later-period-shit by some artists but this just doesn´t make any sense at all. I can´t believe how many Barks fans and sometimes "scholars" get fooled by stuff like this (or worse) regularly. Makes me wonder how they look at the man´s stuff itself- if it looks the same to them... well, the "scholar" goes out the window, but you could still be a fan, only with not clue at all. I mean, Barks for sure had his bad days, but he never turned completely incompetent or into a totally different style... why am I thinking so hard about this? It´s so stupid, but baffling in a fascinating way... what do people SEE when they look at drawings and how far removed is it from the way I, or anyone else for that matter, sees it? If one draws himherself in any professional way, it can make you question everything. Oh, the horrors!
There may be a... strange sounding sentence due to a missing word, but I don't know for sure, not a native speaker. Still, context! ;)
ReplyDeleteEven IF they were made by Barks (horrible thought), the commercial value ought to be very very low in my opinion. I think that Carl Barks original art is supposed to give an aesthetically positive impression, not the contrary...
ReplyDeleteTherefore I prefer the finished (especially comic book) art work by Barks, with the 1948-1949 period as the climax as far as the design of the Ducks is concerned.
more on the topic...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rareandsigned.com/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=165651
Yes, I've seen that eh... "Jippes" piece.
ReplyDeleteIf you use the label "Forgeries"on the bottom of the post it will take you to several posts with really bad art. :-)
http://sekvenskonst.blogspot.se/search/label/Forgeries