Years ago, in the golden age of Hollywood, movies were promoted with glorious, colourful posters, illustrated by artists who still worked with paint and a brush. Film posters are a somewhat under-appreciated genre of art. But some of the world’s most talented artists made their living creating images for movie posters.

I’m passionate about art and I love horror films, so these posters from a bygone era are something I can really get excited about.

There have been many masterpiece horror films produced in the last 80+ years. Some accompanied by very impressive posters. The 1930′s and ’40s saw the creation of some absolutely stunning works of art created to draw in potential paying customers for some of the most iconic, classic films ever made. From the well known: Frankenstein (1931), Dracula (1931), and The Invisible Man (1933); to the slightly lesser known but equally brilliant: The Black Cat (1934), White Zombie (1932) and The Corpse Vanishes (1942).

As with any type of art, there are particular artists and individual works of art that stand out above the rest. I’ve selected six posters by three different artists that are what I consider to be the some of the finest examples of movie poster art in the horror genre.

This is one of my favourite movie posters. Produced by Paramount in 1933, “Supernatural” featured beautiful Hollywood starlet Carole Lombard, the highest paid actor in Hollywood at the time. This is the American release poster, created by Paramount’s chief art director Vincent Trotta and his assistant Maurice Kallis.

Photo of Lombard which served as reference and inspiration for the poster.

While perhaps not the most flattering depiction of the actress, you have to admit that the poster is striking. It’s an attention grabber. The crystal ball, glowing through her fingers, leaves an eerie cast of light on her face, that somehow for all its grotesqueness, still leaves her looking radiant.

Bold, bright colours, strong, readable words, nice composition, lots of detail but not cluttered with unnecessary props or information — executing this design took skill. Remember, the purpose of movie posters was to give viewers a reason to want to see the film. The poster must not only be visually appealing, but give you an idea of what the movie is about. Poster art is no different than any other form of art. It requires thought and preparation. There are certain required elements as well as room for creativity.

Karoly Grosz

The next two posters are both the works of a single artist – Karoly Grosz, a prominent Universal Studios artist who was responsible for creating posters for the most famous of Universal’s monster films including Frankenstein, The Invisible Man and Dracula.

My personal favourite of the two is “Murders in the Rue Morgue” (1932). The colours are just spectacular. The contrast between the glowing green and the black background create a spooky, haunting atmosphere and Lugosi’s expression sets the mood very well.

The other poster, “The Mummy” (1931), while not as eye-catching or visually attractive (in my opinion), would go on to become the most expensive US film poster of all time, when it fetched a remarkable $435,500 at a Sotheby’s auction in 1997. It has since been demoted to the “second” most highly valued movie poster of all time by the sale of the international version of “Metropolis” (1927), purchased in 2005 for a staggering $690,000.

Anselmo Ballester

“The Face Behind the Mask” (1941) – Left: Original Artwork – Right: Finished Poster

Quite possibly the greatest poster artist of all time is Italian born Anselmo Ballester. After attending the Academy of Fine Arts in Rome, Ballester worked in the cinema for both American and Italian film studios until the early 1960′s. He is best known for his superb work done while employed as the head artist of the independent Italian production company, Minerva Films.

Original Artwork by Anselmo Ballester

This is one of two different poster designs Ballester created for the Argentinian film “El Extrano Caso Del Hombre Y El Bestia” (The Strange Case of the Man and the Beast), a Mario Soffici ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ film from 1956. I absolutely love this image. The graphic is bold, impressive and very effective. The modelling of the two faces merging into one has been executed beautifully in this more classical style of poster design. What makes this piece so striking is Ballester’s use of chiaroscuro, which is the modelling of light and dark to create strong contrast. In this piece, the contrast is between the subject and the background.

Ballester exhibited two very distinctive styles of poster painting. A classic, bold, graphic style, like the one above, and a more traditional, realistic, illustrative style, as seen in this Italian poster created for the film “Notre Dame” (1939). The latter style has softer, smoother, cleaner lines, and its composition is drifting towards that of a traditional painting rather than a graphic image.

Ballester designed and painted hundreds of posters, touching every genre of film. This Italian website has a wonderful collection of his incredible work. If you get a chance, take the time to browse through it.

http://www.mat.uniroma1.it/~procesi/ballester-web/ballester-web.html

What are some of the things I love most about Ballester’s work? The wonderful, highly saturated colour of his bold, graphic works, and the subtle gradation of colour in his illustrative pieces. His impeccable attention to detail, from the beautiful, delicate modelling of a woman’s face, to the texture and depth of the fabric that clothes her. And even though Ballester’s brush strokes are often visible, they don’t leave the piece looking “sloppy” which is often the impression they give.

Original artwork by Anselmo Ballester

There is nothing amateurish about Ballester’s work. His skill and passion shine through in every single work of art he ever produced.

“To become a creator of film posters, it is of course, necessary to have some of the innate qualities of a painter – to know how to set a pose, to have some skill at drawing, to have a sense of colour, to possess some imagination and an ability to appreciate beauty . In your childhood, and continuing through your whole life, you must learn to fill your eyes and your soul with the marvelous nature of things and with the way the great painters have passed them on. And it is necessary to study passionately, to always draw and paint everything from the truth. Then you can let your imagination run free. Whether you are creating a work of art, or a more humble advertising poster, you must be able to attract the interest of the public, to satisfy both the most refined people and the roughest, who are the majority.”

~Excerpt from Anselmo Ballester’s diary

Anselmo Ballester passed away at the age of 77 on September 22, 1974. Today marks the 38th anniversary of his death. This incredible artist deserves to be remembered for his magnificent artwork. He is truly a master second to none, not only in the field of film poster art, but as an artist period.

With a little appreciation for our passions in life, we are limited only by our imagination.

Bible Engravings, 1866

His first book was published at the age of 15. A year later, he was the highest paid illustrator in France. During his lifetime, he was literally the most famous artist in the world.

One of the most prolific artists of the 19th century is the French-born (Paul) Gustave Doré. Born in Strasbourg on January 6, 1832, he died in Paris, January 23, 1883.

A visit to Paris when Doré was only 15 years old led to his hiring by publisher Charles Philipon who was so amazed upon viewing the young boy’s talent it’s said that he almost cried. In 1848, Philipon launched a new humour weekly, Journal pour Rire (The Journal For Laughing), and 16-year-old Doré was the featured artist, producing lithographic caricatures. He would continue to build his illustrious career with illustrations for such famous literary works as Dante’s Divine Comedy, Cervantes’ Don Quixote and his only U.S. commission — Edgar Allan Poe’s The Raven. He even created 238 engravings for the best-selling book of all time, The Bible.

Although turning his hand to all forms of art — painting, sculpture and printmaking — Doré’s glorious wood-engravings are what he is best known for. Sometimes dark and reflective, but always stunningly executed, Doré’s wood-engraved book illustrations evoke a strong sense of atmosphere and mood. His work is immediately recognizable to the eye of both critics and laymen alike.

His ability to capture not only the tangible aspects of a scene, but also the spirit of the moment is a rare and very under-appreciated skill in the art world.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

~LONDON~

Westminster Stairs — Steamers Leaving ~London

A collaboration with his friend, journalist Blanchard Jerrold, “London: A Pilgrimage”, published in 1872, is generally regarded as Doré’s greatest achievement. And it’s certainly not difficult to see why.

A Ball at the Mansion House ~London

Doré’s illustrations record and reflect the London that he and Jerrold explored in 1869 – the rich, the poor, the night life, the daytime grind, the opulent glamour and the filthy slums – in short, every aspect of the lives of Londoners. It’s an intimate look at all the great city had to offer.

Inside the Docks ~London

Bishopsgate Street ~London

Westminster Abbey — The Choir ~London

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

~ DANTE’S DIVINE COMEDY~

Dante’s Divine Comedy is comprised of three books: Inferno, Purgatory and Paradise. The first of Doré’s illustrations (for Inferno) were published in 1861. His illustrated Purgatory and Paradise were published later, in 1868, and were released as a single volume.

“This one, who ne’er from me shall be divided, kissed me upon the mouth all palpitating. Galeotto was the book and he who wrote it. That day no farther did we read therein.” ~Inferno

“Then stretched he both his hands unto the boat; whereat my wary Master thrust him back, saying, “Away there with the other dogs!”” ~Inferno

“He reached the gate, and with a little rod he opened it, for there was no resistance.” ~Inferno

“And shadows, that appeared things doubly dead, from out the sepulchres of their eyes betrayed wonder at me, aware that I was living.” ~Purgatory

“Youthful and beautiful in dreams methought I saw a lady walking in a meadow, gathering flowers and singing.” ~Purgatory

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

It is said that Doré’s true passion was painting and that he was determined to be known as a great painter. Unfortunately, in his home country of France (and by many of his peers), he would never be accepted as such.

Doré believed that “art which said nothing, which conveyed no idea, albeit perfect in form and colour, missed the highest quality and raison d’etre (reason for being or the purpose that justifies a thing’s existence) of art.”

Many of Doré’s contemporaries disagreed with his assessment of art. They pointed to his lack of formal training and criticized Doré’s skill as an artist. According to Blanchard Jerrold, who wrote of discussions between Doré and men such as French poet and art critic Pierre Jules Théophile Gautier, “The painters said he could not paint.”

But the obvious talent on display in Doré’s paintings suggest that his critics may have been motivated by professional jealousy. His talent was indeed, as many of Dore’s friends expressed, “on the level with the masterpieces of the Italian masters of the sixteenth century.” Whether viewing his harmonious paintings or strikingly bold engravings, one fact is abundantly clear – Gustave Doré, to this day, remains one of the greatest artists the world has ever known.

Quoth the raven, “Nevermore”.

An iconic line from a famous poem.

Written by a man who was orphaned at the age of three, lost the love of his life to tuberculosis, and then died himself at only 40 years old, it’s instantly recognizable to nearly everyone who reads it. It is the haunting refrain of Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Raven”.

“The Raven” was published on January 29, 1845 in the weekly newspaper the New York Evening Mirror. It was reprinted a month later in both an issue of American Review and The Liberator, as well as countless other publications around the United States in the months following. It is arguably the most famous of Poe’s writings and made him a nationwide household name in a very short period of time.

Today marks the 168^th anniversary of the publication of “The Raven”. This is not only my favourite poem, but also, in my opinion, one of the greatest works of literature ever written, surpassed only by the Bible and Dante’s Divina Commedia. In a mere 108 lines broken down into 18 stanzas, Poe captures the very essence of a man’s soul. He weaves an unforgettable tale of captivating beauty, undying love and heart-wrenching despair.

Much like the narrator in the poem, I too have been haunted by the raven since the moment I first heard that glorious opening line… “Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary…” He bewitched me, and now I can recite “The Raven” from memory, in its entirety. From the first stanza to the last, and from last to first. An impressive, yet completely worthless skill.

Edgar Allan Poe will forever be remembered and revered for this literary masterpiece. It is truly a work of excellence. But there was another man who left an indelible mark of his own on “The Raven”. That man was French artist, Gustave Doré, who in 1882, began his only U.S. Commission – engraving illustrations for “The Raven”. Poe may have written a man’s soul, but it was Doré who brought it to life. Doré’s interpretations were based upon what he saw as, “the enigma of death and the hallucination of an inconsolable soul.” A year later, in early 1883, Doré died just as he was finishing “The Raven” engravings. He was only 51 years old and unfortunately never had the pleasure of seeing his beautiful images published with the poem.

Some of you will be very familiar with “The Raven”, and perhaps others have never read it before. But here it is, in all its glory, complete with Doré’s exquisite engravings. A collaboration of Poe and Doré, two of my greatest inspirations… what could be better? And as an extra treat, you can listen to a wonderful rendition here, read by the incomparable Vincent Price. Enjoy!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

- The Raven -

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore,
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
“‘Tis some visitor,” I muttered, “tapping at my chamber door—
Only this, and nothing more.”

Ah, distinctly I remember it was in the bleak December,
And each separate dying ember wrought its ghost upon the floor.

Eagerly I wished the morrow;—vainly I had sought to borrow
From my books surcease of sorrow—

—sorrow for the lost Lenore—

For the rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore—
Nameless here for evermore.

And the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain
Thrilled me—filled me with fantastic terrors never felt before;
So that now, to still the beating of my heart, I stood repeating

‘Tis some visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door
Some late visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door;—
This it is, and nothing more.”

Presently my soul grew stronger; hesitating then no longer,
“Sir,” said I, “or Madam, truly your forgiveness I implore;
But the fact is I was napping, and so gently you came rapping,
And so faintly you came tapping, tapping at my chamber door,
That I scarce was sure I heard you”—

Here I opened wide the door;—
Darkness there, and nothing more.

Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there wondering, fearing,

Doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before;
But the silence was unbroken, and the stillness gave no token,
And the only word there spoken was the whispered word, “Lenore!”
This I whispered, and an echo murmured back the word, “Lenore!”
Merely this and nothing more.

Back into the chamber turning, all my soul within me burning,
Soon again I heard a tapping, somewhat louder than before.

“Surely,” said I, “surely that is something at my window lattice;
Let me see, then, what thereat is, and this mystery explore—
Let my heart be still a moment and this mystery explore;—
‘Tis the wind and nothing more!”

Open here I flung the shutter, when, with many a flirt and flutter,

In there stepped a stately Raven of the saintly days of yore.
Not the least obeisance made he; not a minute stopped or stayed he;
But, with mien of lord or lady, perched above my chamber door—

Perched upon a bust of Pallas just above my chamber door—
Perched, and sat, and nothing more.

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling,
By the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore,
“Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou,” I said, “art sure no craven,

Ghastly grim and ancient Raven wandering from the Nightly shore,—
Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night’s Plutonian shore!”
Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

Much I marvelled this ungainly fowl to hear discourse so plainly,
Though its answer little meaning—little relevancy bore;
For we cannot help agreeing that no living human being
Ever yet was blessed with seeing bird above his chamber door—
Bird or beast upon the sculptured bust above his chamber door,
With such name as “Nevermore.”

But the Raven, sitting lonely on the placid bust, spoke only
That one word, as if his soul in that one word he did outpour.
Nothing farther then he uttered—not a feather then he fluttered—

Till I scarcely more than muttered, “Other friends have flown before—
On the morrow he will leave me, as my hopes have flown before.”
Then the bird said, “Nevermore.”

Startled at the stillness broken by reply so aptly spoken,
“Doubtless,” said I, “what it utters is its only stock and store,
Caught from some unhappy master whom unmerciful Disaster
Followed fast and followed faster till his songs one burden bore—
Till the dirges of his Hope that melancholy burden bore
Of ‘Never—nevermore.’”

But the Raven still beguiling my sad fancy into smiling,
Straight I wheeled a cushioned seat in front of bird and bust and door;

Then, upon the velvet sinking, I betook myself to linking
Fancy unto fancy, thinking what this ominous bird of yore—
What this grim, ungainly, ghastly, gaunt and ominous bird of yore
Meant in croaking “Nevermore.”

This I sat engaged in guessing, but no syllable expressing
To the fowl whose fiery eyes now burned into my bosom’s core;
This and more I sat divining, with my head at ease reclining
On the cushion’s velvet lining that the lamplight gloated o’er,

But whose velvet violet lining with the lamplight gloating o’er
She shall press, ah, nevermore!

Then, methought, the air grew denser, perfumed from an unseen censer
Swung by seraphim whose foot-falls tinkled on the tufted floor.

“Wretch,” I cried, “thy God hath lent thee—by these angels he hath sent thee
Respite—respite and nepenthe from thy memories of Lenore!
Quaff, oh quaff this kind nepenthe, and forget this lost Lenore!”
Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

“Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil!—prophet still, if bird or devil!—
Whether Tempter sent, or whether tempest tossed thee here ashore,
Desolate yet all undaunted, on this desert land enchanted—

On this home by Horror haunted—

tell me truly, I implore—
Is there—is there balm in Gilead?—tell me—tell me, I implore!”
Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

“Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil—prophet still, if bird or devil!
By that Heaven that bends above, us—by that God we both adore—

Tell this soul with sorrow laden if, within the distant Aidenn,
It shall clasp a sainted maiden whom the angels name Lenore—
Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore.”
Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

‘Be that word our sign of parting, bird or fiend!’ I shrieked, upstarting.

“Get thee back into the tempest and the Night’s Plutonian shore!
Leave no black plume as a token of that lie thy soul hath spoken!
Leave my loneliness unbroken!—quit the bust above my door!
Take thy beak from out my heart, and take thy form from off my door!”
Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

And the Raven, never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting
On the pallid bust of Pallas just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon’s that is dreaming,
And the lamplight o’er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;

And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted—nevermore!”

~ Edgar Allan Poe

Dénouement:  the final outcome of the main dramatic complication in a literary work; the outcome of a complex sequence of events; the end result

Nothing is more clear than that every plot, worth the name, must be elaborated to its dénouement before any thing be attempted with the pen. It is only with the dénouement constantly in view that we can give a plot its indispensable air of consequence, or causation, by making the incidents, and especially the tone at all points, tend to the development of the intention.

In 1846, a year after “The Raven” was published, Edgar Allan Poe wrote “The Philosophy of Composition”, a prose essay explaining his famous poem. A friend and former employer of Poe’s, George Rex Graham (who had declined to be the first to print “The Raven” — a poem he didn’t like — the previous year), would publish the essay in his April issue of Graham’s American Monthly Magazine of Literature and Art.

There are some critics who contend that Poe’s essay is purely fictitious, meant to be nothing more than a piece of imaginative writing instead of a serious examination of his haunting poem. In my opinion, this idea is absolutely ludicrous. “The Philosophy of Composition” is a remarkable piece of literature revealing Poe’s carefully thought-out process of writing. It is an invaluable tool to writers, both professional and amateur alike. Why this essay isn’t a mandatory study in every high school English class in the world is beyond me.

Poe is quick to point out that many writers, poets in particular, are only too happy to have the reader believe “that they compose by a species of fine frenzy — an ecstatic intuition —” when in reality, as Poe will continue to describe in exquisite detail, that could not be further from the truth.

… it will not be regarded as a breach of decorum on my part to show the modus operandi by which one of my own works was put together… It is my design to render it manifest that no one point in its composition is referrible either to accident or intuition — that the work proceeded, step by step, to its completion with the precision and rigid consequence of a mathematical problem.

What I found most enlightening about Poe’s essay was seeing how his writing process was remarkably similar to the process I use when creating a painting. The birth of any work of art, be it a painting or a fine piece of literature, comes with much thought, consideration and careful planning.

The first step Poe takes in the writing of “The Raven” is determining the length of the poem. According to Poe, a poem should fall within “the limit of a single sitting”. Any literary work too long to be read in one sitting compromises the “unity of impression”. If it requires a second sitting to complete, then you risk losing the effectiveness of what you’ve written. As Poe puts it, “…the whole being deprived, through the extremeness of its length, of the vastly important artistic element, totality, or unity, of effect.”

Considering a number of factors, Poe determines that an appropriate length for his poem will be around 100 lines (“The Raven” has 108) – long enough to tell a compelling story and maintain reader interest, but short enough that none of the author’s artistic nuances are lost, and you retain the effective flow of the piece.

For example, if you build up to an exciting climax but then the reader is delayed in reading it, all the work you did to build up to it was for nothing. You’ve lost the effectiveness of the moment. To get the biggest bang for your buck you need to read the piece as a whole, from start to finish, at one time, so that everything is fresh in your mind, and you’re in the moment when the moment comes.

Next Poe decides on the province of the poem, that is, the impression or effect to be conveyed and the tone it will take: “Beauty is the sole legitimate province of the poem. Beauty of whatever kind, in its supreme development, invariably excites the sensitive soul to tears. Melancholy is thus the most legitimate of all the poetical tones.”

Even Poe’s choice of the word for the poem’s refrain – “Nevermore” spoken by a raven – is extremely well thought-out and complex. He chooses to vary the application of the refrain instead of varying the refrain itself. Instead of the refrain being different each time it’s used, when and where the refrain is spoken will vary; he must decide the nature of the refrain, its length and character; where to use it and how it will sound; THEN select a word embodying this sound in keeping with the tone of the poem. Finally, he settles on a pretext for the continuous use of the one word – why is the same word being used over and over again. Poe’s solution: have it spoken by a raven, “the bird of ill omen”.

At last we come to the most important part of the planning process… what is the poem’s topic?

Of all the melancholy topics, what, according to the universal understanding of mankind, is the most melancholy? Death — was the obvious reply. And when is this most melancholy of topics most poetical? When it most closely allies itself to Beauty: the death, then, of a beautiful woman is, unquestionably, the most poetical topic in the world — and equally is it beyond doubt that the lips best suited for such topic are those of a bereaved lover.

“I had now to combine the two ideas, of a lover lamenting his deceased mistress and a Raven continuously repeating the word “Nevermore”…” Here Poe concludes that the Raven will speak the refrain in answer to the queries of the lover. And now the building begins. The queries will begin as commonplace, the first of course is simply the man asking the bird its name. But each query will gradually become more serious until eventually the lover, expecting to hear the Raven’s answer of Nevermore, becomes delirious and half-crazed, asking the final question whose climax involves “the utmost conceivable amount of sorrow and despair.” For me, this is the magic moment.

Here then the poem may be said to have its beginning — at the end, where all works of art should begin — for it was here, at this point of my preconsiderations, that I first put pen to paper in the composition of the stanza:

“Prophet,” said I, “thing of evil! prophet still if bird or devil!

By that heaven that bends above us — by that God we both adore,

Tell this soul with sorrow laden, if within the distant Aidenn,

It shall clasp a sainted maiden whom the angels name Lenore –

Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore.

Quoth the raven, “Nevermore”.”

The very first thing that Poe writes is the climax or conclusion of the story. With the climax established, Poe explains how he could now better vary and graduate the seriousness and importance of the preceding queries of the lover, and in turn make certain that none of the previous stanzas would surpass the climactic one.

Poe continues on in his essay to describe every detail of the poem and how he came about making the choices he did. It is a fascinating journey into the mind of this incredible writer. Poe leaves nothing to chance. He even chooses a bust of Pallas for the Raven to perch upon for the effect of contrast between the light-coloured marble of the bust and the dark plumage of the bird.

When reading the poem, we can see the gradual change which comes over the lover. At first he is amused by the Raven, then his thoughts turn to the slightly fantastical, and finally he turns very serious. “This revolution of thought, or fancy, on the lover’s part, is intended to induce a similar one on the part of the reader — to bring the mind into a proper frame for the dénouement.”

The dénouement or final outcome of the narrative is the Raven’s reply of “Nevermore” to the lover’s final demand if he shall meet his mistress in another world.

Poe’s process is so wonderfully refreshing because he really has thought of everything. The entire series of events is entirely plausible – a raven seeking shelter from the stormy night flies into a man’s house. The bird constantly repeats the only word that it has been taught, but that word “finds immediate echo in the melancholy heart” of the lover who is already wallowing in grief over the death of his beloved Lenore.

And he is impelled by “the human thirst for self-torture.” He keeps asking questions, knowing already what the Raven’s answer will be. Everything is plausible, Poe has kept both feet in reality. There is nothing supernatural about the occurrences in “The Raven”, and perhaps that is what makes the story so striking — the realness of the situation resonates with the reader, giving the poem soul.

Having stayed within the confines of reality, Poe ensures that the poem doesn’t lose its richness and artistic appeal.

“I added the two concluding stanzas of the poem — their suggestiveness being thus made to pervade all the narrative which has preceded them. The under-current of meaning is rendered first apparent in the lines — 

“Take thy beak from out my heart, and take thy form from off my door!”

Quoth the Raven “Nevermore!”

It will be observed that the words, “from out my heart,” involve the first metaphorical expression in the poem. They, with the answer, “Nevermore,” dispose the mind to seek a moral in all that has been previously narrated. The reader begins now to regard the Raven as emblematical — but it is not until the very last line of the very last stanza, that the intention of making him emblematical of Mournful and Never-ending Remembrance is permitted distinctly to be seen:

And the Raven, never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting,

On the pallid bust of Pallas just above my chamber door;

And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon’s that is dreaming,

And the lamplight o’er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;

And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor

Shall be lifted — nevermore.

I strongly urge you to ready Poe’s essay, The Philosophy of Composition, for yourself. It is a veritable fountain of information, and it discusses even more than what I have highlighted here. It is a rare and exciting privilege to take a peek into the mind of a genius, to see how he thinks, to discover the method behind his madness. That is what Poe has given us with this extraordinary piece of literature — a chance to glimpse the master at work.

In all of his writings, from the first line to the last, Edgar Allan Poe truly captivates the imagination. His unmatched literary prowess spanned all topics. The same man that gave us the most beautiful of verses from “Annabel Lee”, “But we loved with a love that was more than love”, also gave us a taste of the torments of the Spanish Inquisition in “The Pit and the Pendulum”. We must stand idly by as a Prince loses the battle to protect himself from the Plague in “Masque of the Red Death”.

But it is in his most brilliant of works, “The Raven”, that Poe reaches his artistic peak. He lays bare a man’s soul, strips his sorrow naked, and illustrates the sad fact that we’re sometimes our own worst enemy.

Painting is poetry that is seen rather than felt, and poetry is painting that is felt rather than seen.

~ Leonardo Da Vinci

The smoke has cleared, the dust has settled. Things have finally returned to normal. Well, as normal as they were before. It’s been a month since my last post, “Quoth the Raven…”, was Freshly Pressed. Boy, what a great feeling it was to add that “Freshly Pressed” badge to my blog!

It was exciting to get the “Congratulations” email (which irritatingly enough, ended up in my junk folder of all places!). But the best part wasn’t the notification or the badge. Nor was it the 190 likes, the 148 comments, the 130+ new blog followers I picked up, or all the neat people I met along the way. No, the BEST part of this experience was telling my best friend about it.

That’s right. Sending off that “OMG! My post got Freshly Pressed!” message to Paul gave me the best feeling. I literally sent that within 60 seconds of discovering the email. Because c’mon, what’s the point of something cool happening to you if you can’t share the joy? In fact, the only thing that tops this moment? Getting the message from him back in November telling ME that HIS post – “Conformity’s Critical Eye” – was Freshly Pressed.

Without Paul, “Quoth the Raven …” would never have come to fruition anyway. It would still be sitting in my drafts folder right now, never to see the light of day. Thank you, Boss, for all the encouragement and for your impeccable editing skills. I literally couldn’t have done it without you. You’re amazing.

So the big question is … what comes next? Well, as the self-proclaimed “Seeker of Truth”, the possibilities are endless. I’ll admit right now that I’m not impressed with myself. I’ve let an entire month go by and I haven’t posted a thing. This was not my intention. In fact, I have no fewer than five blog post drafts on the go right now: Artists, Templars, books to read or skip, a special collaborative Twilight Zone piece w/ Paul, who happens to be Mr. Twilight Zone himself …

But there’s a problem: I don’t want to write. I want to paint.

I go through these phases – for a while I don’t want to even see a paintbrush, but I’m gripped by the urge to write. Then the writing becomes monotonous and I’m filled with a desire to paint. And that’s the phase I’m in right now. I’ve spent the winter writing, trying to avoid my ice box studio, and my fingers are now itching to ditch my keyboard in favour of the texture of canvas.

You fail only if you stop writing.

~ Ray Bradbury

But no worries, I don’t intend to abandon my blog. Not even for a short while. I have big plans for 2013. And with the endless support of My Muse, I promise none of you will regret sticking around to see what the Seeker of Truth can seek out.

Thanks to all of you for reading, sharing, liking, commenting, following and reblogging. Stay tuned. We’ve only just begun …

I learned never to empty the well of my writing, but always to stop when there was still something there in the deep part of the well, and let it refill at night from the springs that fed it.

~ Ernest Hemingway

Edgar Allan Poe may be the king of the macabre tale, but this troubled and tortured soul also had a serious romantic side. We’re all familiar with his works of suspense and horror: “The Raven”, ”The Tell-Tale Heart”, ”The Murders in the Rue Morgue”, and “The Fall of the House of Usher”, to name a few. But I want to introduce you to the softer side of Poe.

Allow me to acquaint you with two of my favourite Poe love poems. The first you may be familiar with, but probably not the second: the haunting “Annabel Lee”, and the somewhat obscure but disturbingly beautiful ”For Annie”.

The death of a beautiful woman is, unquestionably, the most poetical topic in the world — and equally is it beyond doubt that the lips best suited for such topic are those of a bereaved lover.

While Poe wrote these words referencing his poem “The Raven” in the essay “The Philosophy of Composition”, they’re perfectly applicable to “Annabel Lee” as well.

“Annabel Lee” is an agonizing look into the heart and soul of a man who is mourning the woman he loves. I say “loves” — present tense – because it’s clear that even though she’s gone, he’s still in love with her. And that’s what makes this poem so special. It’s not speaking of a love lost, but of a love that’s momentarily absent.

Poe hits the tone of this poem beautifully. It’s full of gorgeous imagery and exquisitely crafted verses. It’s lyrical and exceptionally moving. Poe strikes a balance of melancholy and sorrow, without letting the piece become depressing.

Irresistible to the hopeless romantics among us, “Annabel Lee” will appeal to all die-hard Poe fans alike. With it, Poe has once again left his unique, indelible mark on the soul of all who read his writing.

♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦

Annabel Lee

It was many and many a year ago,
In a kingdom by the sea,
That a maiden there lived whom you may know
By the name of Annabel Lee;
And this maiden she lived with no other thought
Than to love and be loved by me.

I was a child and she was a child,
In this kingdom by the sea;

 I and my Annabel Lee;
With a love that the winged seraphs of heaven
Coveted her and me.

And this was the reason that, long ago,
In this kingdom by the sea,
A wind blew out of a cloud, chilling
My beautiful Annabel Lee;
So that her highborn kinsman came
And bore her away from me,
To shut her up in a sepulchre
In this kingdom by the sea.

The angels, not half so happy in heaven,
Went envying her and me-
Yes!- that was the reason (as all men know,
In this kingdom by the sea)
That the wind came out of the cloud by night,
Chilling and killing my Annabel Lee.

But our love it was stronger by far than the love
Of those who were older than we-
Of many far wiser than we-
And neither the angels in heaven above,
Nor the demons down under the sea,
Can ever dissever my soul from the soul
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee.

For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And the stars never rise but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side

 In the sepulchre there by the sea,
In her tomb by the sounding sea.

♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦

“For Annie” was a poem that I stumbled across in my reading one day. I had never heard of it, but when I read it, it made my heart ache. What an incredibly touching poem this is. I’m shocked that it isn’t more widely known amongst not only Poe’s work, but poetry in general.

There isn’t much for me to say about “For Annie”. The poem speaks for itself, possibly better than any other of Poe’s writings. This is truly a work of art. It’s sad and disturbing, but again, Poe has carefully navigated the fine line between pensive wistfulness and all-out despair.

While the topic is once again death, Poe has used the narrator’s positive thoughts of his Annie to provide a spark of hope, and by the time we reach the end of the poem, the reader is bathed with a true sense of peace. A remarkable feat, the likes of which only Edgar Allan Poe could accomplish. And what could be more beautiful and optimistic than finding comfort in spite of death, because you love and are loved?

♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦

For Annie

Thank Heaven! the crisis-
The danger is past,
And the lingering illness
Is over at last-
And the fever called “Living”
Is conquered at last.

Sadly, I know
I am shorn of my strength,
And no muscle I move
As I lie at full length-
But no matter!-I feel
I am better at length.

The moaning and groaning,
The sighing and sobbing,
Are quieted now,
With that horrible throbbing
At heart:- ah, that horrible,
Horrible throbbing!

The sickness- the nausea-
The pitiless pain-
Have ceased, with the fever
That maddened my brain-
With the fever called “Living”
That burned in my brain.

And oh! of all tortures
That torture the worst
Has abated- the terrible
Torture of thirst
For the naphthaline river
Of Passion accurst:-
I have drunk of a water
That quenches all thirst:-

And ah! let it never
Be foolishly said
That my room it is gloomy
And narrow my bed;
For man never slept
In a different bed-
And, to sleep, you must slumber
In just such a bed.

My tantalized spirit
Here blandly reposes,
Forgetting, or never
Regretting its roses-
Its old agitations
Of myrtles and roses:

For now, while so quietly
Lying, it fancies
A holier odor
About it, of pansies-
A rosemary odor,
Commingled with pansies-
With rue and the beautiful
Puritan pansies.

And so it lies happily,
Bathing in many
A dream of the truth
And the beauty of Annie-
Drowned in a bath
Of the tresses of Annie.

When the light was extinguished,
She covered me warm,
And she prayed to the angels
To keep me from harm-
To the queen of the angels
To shield me from harm.

And I lie so composedly,
Now, in my bed,
(Knowing her love)
That you fancy me dead-
And I rest so contentedly,
Now, in my bed,
(With her love at my breast)
That you fancy me dead-
That you shudder to look at me,
Thinking me dead.

But my heart it is brighter
Than all of the many
Stars in the sky,
For it sparkles with Annie-

 With the thought of the light
Of the eyes of my Annie.

It’s clear that Poe understood what so few people do — what it’s like to truly ”LOVE” someone. Today this word gets tossed around as if it were common and unremarkable. Every day is filled with, “I love this, I love that, and I love you,” but, oh, how we’re misusing a word which, when used properly, speaks louder than anything you can imagine. It’s been cheapened and sullied, and no longer has any real meaning.

So what is the true meaning of the word “love”? If you want to know whether or not you love someone, ask yourself two questions: 1) “Can I live without this person?” And most importantly, 2) “Would I give my life for this person?” If you answer “no” to either of those questions, or you even have to ponder your answer, then you have no business allowing the words “I love you” to pass your lips. And feelings you have which are devoid of these two points are not love at all. Not real love. Not true love.

“But we loved with a love that was more than love.” When you feel THAT? Then, and only then, have you experienced love the way God intended it to be: pure, perfect, and true. Untainted by appearance or convenience. Unmarred by circumstance and situation. Love in its purest, truest form doesn’t need to be learned. It can’t be manufactured, and it surely can’t be pretended. And most importantly, it can’t be undone.

There is no falling out of love. There’s only never having loved in the first place.

♥ ♥

♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦

Every artist needs a space. A space to call their own. A place that inspires creativity and is conducive to productivity. Every artist needs a studio.

Gather and hoard your inspirations as you live, then recapture them as needed in the studio.

~ Nita Engle

A few of my hoarded inspirations. Dracula, Nefertiti, a Doctor Who (10th Doctor of course) sonic screwdriver, and my Complete Definitive Collection Twilight Zone DVDs. Best birthday gift ever.

Duane Bryers is best known for his plus-size, red-headed pin-up, Hilda. These three wonderfully whimsical artist-pose pin-ups hang above my window. One of my favourite studio pieces is the stone bust (sporting my graduation cap!). A homemade Twilight Zone “Willoughby” sign hangs above the doorway, as does one of just a few sassy pin-up-style tin signs.

It doesn’t have to be fancy or filled with expensive art supplies, and you don’t have to put a lot of money into it. It doesn’t need to be a smarmy loft area, or a quaint little separate building in the backyard. It doesn’t need to have wall to wall windows or a huge work surface.

No, the only requirement of an artist’s studio is that it reflect the personality and taste of the artist who works there. As the artist, it’s the one place you should be completely comfortable in. It needs to be what YOU want, what YOU like, and most importantly, the place you’re going to want to go and work.

All artists are different. Different styles, different techniques, different inspirations, different needs. So no two studios will be alike. My studio is where I spend the bulk of my time. It’s MY space, filled with the things I enjoy. Being in that room makes me want to be creative, and that’s the whole point of having a work space.

So how about a peek inside my studio?

What you’ll see when you walk in

Too many artists get seduced by sunlight and have to continually adjust for light variations. The lighting conditions in [my studio] are perfect. It never changes from day to night. I always know the color on the canvas is what I want it to be.

~ Jack Cassinetto

Before we look at the fun stuff, let me impart a little wisdom here. That quote is SO true. One of the biggest misconceptions in the art world is that natural light is the best light source to work by. If you’ve ever actually tried to work in front of a huge window, you’ll know that simply isn’t the case. Natural light is bright and harsh. It can be blinding and overpowering, it distorts colours and casts shadows which are difficult to work around.

As you can see from the photo, I too was initially seduced by this supposed “Artist’s Choice” of lighting. The first sunny morning I sat down to work at my desk, I knew I’d made a big mistake in believing the hype. Painting, sketching, or even using my computer before noon? Forget it. There’s just too much light. And my five-foot picture window happens to be facing east, compounding the problem. A large window has its benefits, and working in the afternoon when the light is less intense isn’t too bad. But take it from me, it is less than ideal. My next studio will rely on artificial light which I will strategically place to avoid things like hand shadows and glares.

Okay. There’s my lesson for the day. Now, sit back, relax, and we’ll take a tour of my creative space.

At one end of my studio is something you’ll find in practically every room of my house – a bookcase. I have an actual library upstairs, and it’s a fair size, but let’s face it. Unless your name is Belle and you’re married to the Beast, your library is going to have to be of a moderate size. Meaning books will likely spill into many of your other rooms.

You can learn a lot about a person by snooping through their books. This bookcase is art-related only. Well, related to MY art. I love Bible symbolism and the Latin language, so I have a Strong’s Concordance and an English/Latin dictionary mixed in with the other more conventional art books. A few anatomy books can be found, as well as books focusing on my favourite artists — Da Vinci, Caravaggio, Michelangelo, Bob Ross. An illustrated history of the first Crusades and a collection of horror movie posters are in there as well. Practical and inspirational.

And of course in my studio there was bound to be a Bible. Displayed on its own shelf with my cool Angels and Demons bookends.

I looked at my studio as a painting. Now whenever I need a break, I paint this area where I just love to be.

~ Richard Poink

At the opposite end is a comfortable spot – a necessity in a studio as far as I’m concerned. As I’ve said in past art-related posts, 50% of the work you do when creating something is in the designing stage. So a quiet spot in a room which is meant to inspire you, can be the perfect place to brainstorm ideas and do a little design work.

In a painting studio, you have to have a display wall to show off some of the goods. Prove that you do at least SOME work in there. It can be tempting to sit around watching episodes of the Twilight Zone all day long. Not that I’ve ever done that…

Speaking of the Twilight Zone…

Above the smaller window is a little collection of fun things, including two of my favourite possessions: a mini TZ Mystic Seer and a Howling Man doll. There are no words to express how fond I am of those. A plastic raven (looks more like a crow, but beggars can’t be choosers – it was a dollar!) paying homage to Edgar Allan Poe, as well as a few other items that mean something to me. I especially like the quote on the little pin attached to my Nancy Drew 75^th Anniversary ornament, which says, “The fact that no one understands you doesn’t make you an artist.”

Here you can see my marvellous revolving book stand. A birthday gift a few years ago from my dad, who made it for me. I designed the panels in a Byzantine/illuminated manuscript style. Each side features a favourite Bible verse and one of the four living creatures of Daniel and Revelation. There’s a compass rose on top, and each of the panels can be propped open to hold a book. One of my favourite pieces and very helpful when working with multiple reference books. And if you’re interested in a closer look at that large painting on the left, “Armageddon“, I have a number of posts written about it.

Without the studio, however humble, the room where the imagination can enter cannot exist

~ Anna Hansen

All this practical stuff is nice, but there are more fun things in my studio as well. Case in point, the newest addition: a fabulous pair of fuchsia heels!

My gorgeous pink shoes, bought to be displayed. On the wall is a lithograph print of a painting I was commissioned to do: “Still Life Portrait: Megan”. And below the shelf is another of my favourite Duane Bryers’ Hilda pin-ups.

I do like figurines and toys (in case you hadn’t noticed), and here are a few more. I made the prop “I Dream of Jeannie” bottle many years ago. I’m a big Tinkerbell fan (Peter Pan is my favourite Disney story). But my Jasmine Becket-Griffith “Once Upon A Midnight Dreary” figure is awesome. All of Poe’s “The Raven” is written on that paper scroll.

But wait. Something’s missing here. It’s a studio, where I paint. So where are the paints?

Housed in two custom built paint bottle-sized cabinets, hung on either side of the picture window, are the paints. Acrylics, arranged by colour, from dark to light. What can I say? Some people like to be messy and chaotic. I enjoy order and neatness, especially in my work area.

An artist cannot do anything slovenly.

~ Jane Austen

In most studios, this would likely be the end of the tour. You’d have seen everything there is to see. But… this isn’t most studios. Thanks for stopping by. Visitors are always welcome. Be sure and look UP on your way out.

The ceiling is big time real estate. No sense in wasting it! And don’t you dare judge me for the Edward poster. Those books were amazing.

Studio Ghosts: When you’re in the studio painting, there are a lot of people in there with you – your teachers, friends, painters from history, critics… and one by one if you’re really painting, they walk out. And if you’re REALLY painting, YOU walk out.

~ Philip Guston

♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦     ♦

The Twilight Zone has a little something for everyone. Mystery, drama, morality, redemption, and a touch of fun. At the helm was series’ creator Rod Serling, who along with a number of other supremely talented writers – Charles Beaumont and Richard Matheson, to name a few – penned the richly chilling, thought-provoking scripts my best friend Paul and I have come to hold so dear.

But what really made the stories of the Twilight Zone hit home were the characters. Perhaps you felt for them or related to their particular situation or circumstance; maybe they inspired you, either in action or with words; or perhaps you loved to hate them. Whatever the case though, every character is only as good as the actor or actress portraying them. And while the Zone boasts an impressive roster of famous celebrity men – William Shatner, Burgess Meredith, Jack Klugman, Jonathan Winters – there is no shortage of glamourous leading ladies in the Fifth Dimension.

Today I have a very special treat in store for my fellow Seekers of Truth. Many of you know my friend Paul from his blog, “Shadow & Substance”, or his Twitter page, @TheNightGallery. Paul and I have many things in common, but the one thing that stands out most is our mutual love and admiration for all things Twilight Zone. So I asked Paul if he’d like to join me and guest-blog on Seeker of Truth. Thankfully, he said yes. A very enthusiastic “yes”, I might add. And I enthusiastically replied, “YAH!”

We do a lot of collaborating behind the scenes when it comes to both of our respective blogs, but we haven’t had an opportunity to showcase what we can do together, in front of the camera, so to speak.

Until now. So submitted for your approval, allow Paul and I to introduce you to the…

Mannequin, carnival dancer, soldier, witch, patient, wife, ghost, traveller, and the Devil herself – a collection of memorable leading lady characters.

In the dimension of imagination, you’ll find these women in some of the Zone’s most memorable tales. Both the characters themselves and the actresses who play them exude a kind of inexplicable allure. So for me it just seemed perfect to pair them with another inexplicable allure – the pin-up-girl-type illustration. I have been a fan of pin-up art forever. Pin-ups are subtle sexy. To me, a pin-up should be a sexy lady depicted with an air of mystery about her. Nude pin-ups are not sexy. The clothing is as much a part of the pin-up appeal as the pose and girl herself. So I’ve made all our favourite TZ ladies into classic pin-up girls. These are all original sketches that I created for this post.

Paul is co-writing this piece with me, so to make it a little easier for our readers to know who’s speaking, all of Paul’s text will be in white. Paul, today you are an honourary Seeker of Truth, my friend.

Thank you for inviting me, Wendy. As an unabashed fan of your blog, I feel privileged to join you for this special post. Your passion for art, faith and pop culture makes your work uniquely appealing. And as a diehard Twilight Zone fan, I feel like I’ve long been preparing for a role as a Seeker of Truth.

George Clayton Johnson, who wrote such memorable TZ episodes as “Kick the Can” and “Nothing in the Dark”, called the show “wisdom fiction”, and I believe our blogs are popular specifically because they delve into this wisdom — how it works and why. Now, at first glance, the idea of doing “pin-ups” of TZ heroines might sound as if we’ve moved pretty far afield of this mission, but I think it makes perfect sense.

Part of what made TZ work, after all, were the people at the heart of the stories. Serling, Matheson, Beaumont and the other writers sketched some marvelous characters — characters brought to life by some amazingly talented men and women. Today, through the magic of your artwork, we pay tribute to the actresses — their beauty, certainly, but also the heart and soul BEHIND the pretty faces.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Anne Francis/Marsha White/Jess-Belle

“The After Hours” and “Jess-Belle”

Season 1, Episode 34 and Season 4, Episode 7

“When you’re on the outside, everything seems so normal.”

If you bought a gift at a department store, saw it was damaged, went to return it, and recognized a mannequin as the sales woman who helped you, you’d quite sensibly conclude that you were seeing things. And if you were madly in love with a man betrothed to another woman, and the local witch offered you a too-good-to-be-true way to make that man your own, you’d probably laugh in her face.

Unless, of course, you’re Marsha White and Jess-Belle, and you’ve just taken your first steps into the fifth dimension. Then you’d know that the sales woman IS a mannequin — and so are you. And you’d not only believe the local witch, you’d accept her offer, only to discover that you were destined to turn into a leopard every night.

Anchoring “The After Hours” and “Jess-Belle” is Anne Francis, one of the most popular actresses of the 1960s. Her striking blue eyes (noticeable even in the stark B&W photography of the Zone) and porcelain features are abetted by a natural charm that helps us identify strongly with her characters.

We fear for her when she builds to a state of near-hysteria as Marsha, trapped in a dark and empty department store. We weep for her as she realizes she’s been tricked as the raven-haired Jess-Belle.

Although Francis’ career included a LOT of television work, it began with one of the most famous sci-fi films of the ’50s: Forbidden Planet. Roles on Rawhide, The Untouchables, Route 66 and dozens of other series followed. Francis even starred in a series of her own, playing a sexy private eye in Honey West. She later graced episodes of Dallas, Fantasy Island and Murder She Wrote.

“Was it fun?”, one of Francis’ fellow mannequins asks her. “Ever so much fun”, she replies. Watching her work on the Twilight Zone, we can’t help but agree.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Elizabeth Montgomery/The Woman

“Two”

Season 3, Episode 1

“Precrassny.”

With only a single word of dialogue for the entire episode, Elizabeth Montgomery captured our hearts. Acting alongside Charles Bronson, who’s billed simply as “The Man”, Montgomery is a Russian soldier left alive and alone in the aftermath of a devastating world war. Still beautiful even in her tattered uniform, Montgomery spends the episode wandering through a deserted town, interacting in a very nervous and volatile way with Bronson.

There’s much to be said for any actor/actress who delivers a beautiful, convincing performance with little to no dialogue. And I think all will agree that Montgomery delivers.

She appeared in this episode of the Twilight Zone in 1961, but her big break came in 1964 when she starred in the sitcom Bewitched as Samantha Stephens, wife of Darrin, first portrayed by another TZ alumni, Dick York (“A Penny For Your Thoughts”).

In 2005, a bronze statue of Montgomery as witch Samantha riding a broom, was erected in Salem, Massachusetts.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Suzanne Lloyd/Maya

“Perchance to Dream”

Season 1, Episode 9

“I know a lot of things. I’m Maya.”

We instinctively recoil in frightening situations, understandably concerned with our own safety. Yet as Edgar Allan Poe demonstrated so masterfully in “The Imp of the Perverse”, we also experience an inexplicable urge to embrace danger. Charles Beaumont explored that same paradoxical urge when he introduced us to the alluring Maya the Cat Girl in one of the most visually striking Twilight Zone episodes, “Perchance to Dream“.

Maya haunts Edward Hall, a man with a bad heart who just wants a good night’s sleep. The reason he can’t get one? His overactive imagination. In his dreams, he’s met Maya at an odd and mysterious carnival. He’s under doctor’s orders to avoid excitement, but Maya insists on dragging him into the fun house and on the roller coaster. When she takes an unexpected walk into the real world, Edward’s fate seems pre-ordained.

Suzanne Lloyd’s portrayal of Maya dramatizes his dilemma to perfection. Only a very beautiful actress could make us believe Edward’s bizarre desire for thrills that place him in peril, but Lloyd tinges that attractiveness with an unmistakable sense of danger. We know that Edward should resist her seductive charm, but as Lloyd purrs each line, we know he’s being inescapably ensnared.

Lloyd brought the same unique brand of enticement to many other TV shows in the early ’60s, such as Gunsmoke, Bonanza, 77 Sunset Strip, Maverick and Perry Mason, to name only a few. But as Maya, she put an indelible face on the idea of “fatal attraction” long before the 1987 movie of the same name.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Inger Stevens/Nan Adams/Jana Loren

“The Hitch-hiker” and “The Lateness of the Hour”

Season 1, Episode 16 and Season 2, Episode 8

“The fear has left me now. I’m numb, I have no feeling. It’s as if someone had pulled out some kind of a plug in me and everything– emotion, feeling, fear– has drained out.”

“The Hitch-hiker” is, to me, one of the quintessential scary episodes of the Twilight Zone. Nan Adams, played by Swedish actress Inger Stevens, is haunted by a mysterious hitch-hiker whose intentions, as it turns out, aren’t malevolent. He’s just trying to ease her into the realization that she’s actually dead. Stevens takes us on a full circle emotional journey, hitting on fear, shock, disbelief and finally acceptance. A stellar performance.

Inger is one of 35 actresses who appeared in more than one TZ (and possibly the most recognizable). Her second appearance was “The Lateness of the Hour” (one of six episodes shot on videotape instead of film), in which she portrays Jana, a girl who discovers that her parents have been keeping a secret from her — she’s actually a robot.

Stevens’ signature role came in 1963 on ABC’s The Farmer’s Daughter, where she played Katy Holstrum. It ran for three years and also starred TZ’s resident Major (“Five Characters in Search of an Exit”), William Windom.

Inger’s life came to a tragic end on April 30, 1970, when she died as the result of a suspected suicide. The actress was only 34.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Donna Douglas/Janet Tyler

“Eye of the Beholder”

Season 2, Episode 6

“Why do we have to look like this?”

Poor Janet Tyler. She suffers the unspeakable misfortune of being “ugly” in a society that worships beauty. In fact, she’s forced to undergo a series of operations to “fix” her appearance and make her less repellant. Listening to her heartfelt pleas to be “cured”, to somehow blend in with society, we can’t help but feel sorry for her. And when she explodes over the unfairness of it all, we’re struck by the injustice.

And that’s before we even get a chance to see her face. In a series famous for its twist endings, “Eye of the Beholder” gives us one of the most memorable in TV history: Miss Tyler, you see, is actually quite beautiful … and the doctors and nurses have grotesque, pig-like faces.

Donna Douglas gets relatively little screen time (Maxine Stuart played all the under-the-bandages scenes), but her touching portrayal of the “ugly” Miss Tyler is part of the reason this episode has become so legendary. Douglas obviously is blessed with good looks, but she has the acting talent to match. The terror and sorrow on her face and in her voice help us sympathize with Miss Tyler even more.

As an example of how willing Douglas was to go the extra mile, consider the fact that her voice was supposed to be dubbed by Stuart until she surprised director Douglas Heyes with a perfect impression — and was then allowed to speak all the post-operation lines herself. Donna returned to TZ for a bit part in “Cavender is Coming”.

She went on to star in her most famous role, that of Elly May Clampett on The Beverly Hillbillies (with another TZ alum, Buddy Ebsen). She appeared in more than a dozen other series before that, including 77 Sunset Strip and Dr. Kildare, and even had a part in Frankie and Johnny with Elvis Presley.

But to TZ fans, she’ll always be poor Janet Tyler, ostracized for the crime of being ugly.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Patricia Breslin/Pat Carter

“Nick of Time” and “No Time Like the Past”

Season 2, Episode 7 and Season 4, Episode 10

“It doesn’t matter whether it can foretell the future. What matters is whether you believe more in luck and in fortune than you do in yourself.”

Patricia Breslin also has two TZs under her belt. She’s best known as the supportive yet level-headed Pat Carter, wife of superstitious Don (William Shatner), in the classic episode “Nick of Time”, where she goes head to head with the all-powerful allure of the Mystic Seer. But she also filled the lesser-known role of teacher Abigail Sloan in the hour-long season 4 time-travel episode, “No Time Like the Past”.

Breslin’s strong yet subtle portrayal of a wife who’s determined to keep her husband’s feet planted in reality is one of my favourite female TZ performances. Pat is a lovely, demure woman, but when it comes right down to brass tacks, she’s determined to save her husband from the dangerous, slippery slope he’s sliding down. Breslin delivers some of the most powerful lines of dialogue the series has to offer. And she does it with a harmonious blend of grace, conviction, and a touch of desperation.

After her time on the Twilight Zone, Breslin played Laura Brooks in the ABC prime time soap opera, Peyton Place, following that up with a more major role in another ABC soap, the still-running General Hospital. From 1965 to 1969, she was nurse Meg Baldwin.

Richard Matheson – writer of “Nick of Time” — enjoyed Breslin’s performance as Pat Carter so much that he originally wanted her for the role of Shatner’s wife a second time in the fan-favourite (also Matheson-penned) episode “Nightmare at 20,000 Feet”. I must disagree with Matheson though. Personally, I don’t believe that Breslin was right for the role of Julia Wilson, and I would hate to see her memorable role in “Nick of Time” having to compete with another, perhaps more iconic portrayal in “Nightmare”. No, Pat Carter is a heroine deserving of her own spotlight.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Vera Miles/Millicent Barnes

“Mirror Image”

Season 1, Episode 21

“Delusions, that’s what they are. They’re delusions.”

Woman waits for bus. Woman starts seeing her double. Woman doubts her sanity.

A simple premise, really, but run through Serling’s typewriter, “Mirror Image” becomes an unforgettable exercise in existential terror. We’re as much in the dark as Millicent Barnes as she tries to make sense of the situation. She goes to check her bag … and the annoyed attendant tells her she already has. She steps into the restroom … and catches a glimpse of her duplicate in the mirror. What’s going ON here?

Millicent has a theory. It’s something she once read: there’s another plane of existence out there. We each have a double in it, and sometimes that double crosses into our world, and tries to take over. Paul Grinstead, a friendly fellow bus passenger, is concerned that this poor woman has gone mad. He calls for the police to take her away — moments before seeing his OWN double.

Vera Miles turns in a wonderfully controlled performance of a woman trying not to panic in the face of a frightening and confusing turn of events. Watching her calmly explain the theory of parallel universes, it’s hard not to conclude that she IS mad, despite our having just seen the same strange sights that she has. Miles expertly keeps us balanced on that edge of doubt as we try to figure out if she’s right … or crazy.

Unlike most of the other pin-ups presented here, Miles was well-known to audiences when she appeared on TZ, starring in such movies as Alfred Hitchcock’s The Wrong Man (with Henry Fonda) and John Ford’s masterful Western The Searchers. But her most famous role was that of Lila Crane in Hitchcock’s Psycho. (It had already been filmed by the time “Mirror Image” aired, but not yet released.)

Easy to imagine Millicent Barnes sharing a padded room with Norman Bates, isn’t it?

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Julie Newmar/Miss Devlin

“Of Late I Think of Cliffordville”

Season 4, Episode 14

“I wish for you everything you deserve.”

The fact that you already bargained your soul away doesn’t mean that Miss Devlin won’t make an exception and negotiate an alternate form of payment for her services. You’ll find that she’s very accommodating.

Under the momentary guise of a travel agent, Julie Newmar’s sultry Miss Devlin, makes a deal with one William J. Feathersmith: She’ll send him back in time to start his life anew, in exchange for a simple monetary transaction – it’ll cost nearly his entire net worth.

He takes the deal, but Feathersmith soon learns that this lady-Devil has taught him a rather poignant lesson, the likes of which can be found only … in the Twilight Zone.

Newmar was a real-life pin-up girl, posing for various things, including a 1968 issue of Playboy. But Newmar’s most memorable role is that of sexy villainess Catwoman in the 1966 cult classic Batman series starring Adam West. The original femme fatale (her role was taken over by Eartha Kitt in the third and final season), mesmerized audiences with her purrrrfectly tantalizing rolling “Rs” and that skin-tight catsuit with the belt slung low on the hip to emphasize her amazing figure.

And I’m certain the sassy, classy Miss Devlin would have gladly donned a pair of Julie’s “Nudemar” pantyhose, patented in 1977, which she claimed would “make your derriere look like an apple instead of a ham sandwich”.

◊   ◊   ◊   ◊   ◊

Working on this post has given me a greater appreciation for the actresses who graced episodes of The Twilight Zone. The “subtle sexy” attraction of a pin-up is well-suited to the classier age in which The Twilight Zone was produced, and Wendy’s talented work has captured this era beautifully.

I also found it very interesting to learn more about the women who helped bring these stories to life. I know the episodes cold, of course, but much of the other movie and TV work these women had done was fairly new to me. It made me realize how hard they worked to develop their craft, and to give these small-screen tales a bigger-than-life dimension.

Most of all, I enjoyed collaborating with my best friend, the one and only Wendy. My “Gal Friday” has long provided invaluable assistance to me on MY blog, so it was a real pleasure to contribute something so substantial to HER blog. I hope this is the first of many joint blog posts with her!

Oh, yes, this is only just the beginning! Many more Paul&Wendy collaborations to come!

A very special thanks to Paul for being a part of this special post. It was tremendously enjoyable to work with him. And who better to help me spotlight any aspect of TZ than Mr. Twilight Zone himself?

We watch these actresses on screen again and again, but it’s important to recognize that they’re so much more than a bunch of pretty faces. We admire their beauty, yes, just like we admire a classic pin-up or a beautiful painting. But there is so much more to these ladies than meets the eye. As with any work of art, you have to look deeper to truly appreciate what you’re looking at. What’s behind that lovely facade?

Both the unforgettable characters and the incredibly talented actresses who portray them have substance. And in the land of both shadow AND substance, well… that’s what you need.

A mannequin, a carnival dancer, a soldier, a witch, a patient, a wife, a ghost, a traveller, and the Devil herself. Tonight’s cast of leading ladies in the Fifth Dimension – known as – The Twilight Zone.

◊   ◊   ◊

… † …

There are many memorable pairings in the world of horror: Peter Cushing & Christopher Lee, Van Helsing & Dracula, Doctor Frankenstein & his Monster, Scooby Doo & Shaggy. And here is another interesting duo for your consideration — Vincent Price & Edgar Allan Poe.

If you’re a fan of Poe and a fan of Price, and you happen to be a film producer, the only logical thing to do is adapt Poe to the big screen and cast Vincent Price as your lead. Which is exactly what film producer Roger Corman did.

Between 1960 and 1964, Corman produced eight films adapted from Edgar Allan Poe’s writings. Only one of the films, “The Premature Burial” (1962), didn’t star Vincent Price.

Corman covered the most popular and recognizable of Poe’s tales. For his “Poe Cycle”, he collaborated with writers Richard Matheson (“The Fall of the House of Usher”, “The Pit and the Pendulum”, “The Raven“, “Tales of Terror”), and Charles Beaumont (“Masque of the Red Death”, “The Haunted Palace”). At the time, both men were hard at work writing for one of my all-time favourite shows, the classic, ever-popular anthology series, The Twilight Zone.

With Halloween little more than a week away, here is a pictorial look at the unique pairing of Poe & Price for you to savour. And if you’ve never watched these films or it’s been a while, then why not have yourself a little Halloween marathon? Enjoy, darlings.

The condition of man: bound on an island from which he can never hope to escape; surrounded by the waiting pit of Hell; subject to the inexorable pendulum of fate – which must destroy him, finally.

~ Nicholas/Sebastian Medina, “Pit and the Pendulum”

… † …

The Fall of the House of Usher

1960

Vincent Price as Roderick Usher

While I gazed, this fissure rapidly widened — there came a fierce breath of the whirlwind — the entire orb of the satellite burst at once upon my sight — my brain reeled as I saw the mighty walls rushing asunder — there was a long tumultuous shouting sound like the voice of a thousand waters — and the deep and dank tarn at my feet closed sullenly and silently over the fragments of the “House of Usher”.

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Fall of the House of Usher”

… † …

Pit and the Pendulum

1961

Vincent Price as Nicholas/Sebastian Medina

A suffocating odour pervaded the prison! A deeper glow settled each moment in the eyes that glared at my agonies! A richer tint of crimson diffused itself over the pictured horrors of blood. I panted! I gasped for breath! There could be no doubt of the design of my tormentors — oh! most unrelenting! oh! most demoniac of men!

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Pit and the Pendulum”

… † …

Tales of Terror

1962

Vincent Price as Locke, Fortunato, Luchresi, M. Valdemar

This anthology film is based on three of Poe’s short stories: “Morella”, “The Black Cat” (loosely combined with “The Cask of Amontillado”), and ”The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar.”

“It is a day of days,” she said, as I approached; “a day of all days either to live or die. It is a fair day for the sons of earth and life — ah, more fair for the daughters of heaven and death! I am dying, yet shall I live. The days have never been when thou couldst love me — but her whom in life thou didst abhor, in death thou shalt adore.”

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “Morella”

The corpse, already greatly decayed and clotted with gore, stood erect before the eyes of the spectators. Upon its head, with red extended mouth and solitary eye of fire, sat the hideous beast whose craft had seduced me into murder, and whose informing voice had consigned me to the hangman. I had walled the monster up within the tomb!

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Black Cat”

As I rapidly made the mesmeric passes, amid ejaculations of “dead! dead!” absolutely bursting from the tongue and not from the lips of the sufferer, his whole frame at once  – within the space of a single minute, or even less, shrunk — crumbled — absolutely rotted away beneath my hands. Upon the bed, before that whole company, there lay a nearly liquid mass of loathsome — of detestable putridity.

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar”

… † …

The Raven

1962 –– Dr. Erasmus Craven

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling, by the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore, “Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou,” I said, “art sure no craven. Ghastly grim and ancient Raven wandering from the Nightly shore,— Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night’s Plutonian shore!” Quoth the Raven, “Nevermore.”

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Raven”

… † …

The Haunted Palace

1963 -– Charles Dexter Ward/Joseph Curwen

But evil things, in robes of sorrow, assailed the monarch’s high estate; (Ah, let us mourn!—for never morrow shall dawn upon him, desolate!) and round about his home the glory that blushed and bloomed is but a dim-remembered story of the old time entombed.

~Edgar Allan Poe, “The Haunted Palace”

… † …

The Masque of the Red Death

1964 –– Prince Prospero

And now was acknowledged the presence of the Red Death. He had come like a thief in the night. And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. And the life of the ebony clock went out with that of the last of the gay. And the flames of the tripods expired. And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “The Masque of the Red Death”

… † …

The Tomb of Ligeia

1964 -– Verden Fell

Shrinking from my touch, she let fall from her head, unloosened, the ghastly cerements which had confined it, and there streamed forth, into the rushing atmosphere of the chamber, huge masses of long and dishevelled hair; it was blacker than the raven wings of the midnight! And now slowly opened the eyes of the figure which stood before me. “Here then, at least,” I shrieked aloud, “can I never — can I never be mistaken — these are the full, and the black, and the wild eyes — of my lost love — of the lady — of the LADY LIGEIA.

~ Edgar Allan Poe, “Ligeia”

Until next time, unpleasant dreams . . .

^..^

Love of beauty is taste. The creation of beauty is art.

~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Gil Elvgren

The female form is one of the most beautiful objects in all of God’s vast creation. Beauty is, of course, subjective. Even Rod Serling reminded us that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. But in the art of the classic pin-up girl, an idealistic beauty is pretty standard: Big, bright, lash-y eyes. A sly smile, gently pouted lip, or dazzling pearly whites. An hourglass figure, softly curving in and out at the waist. Silky, gleaming hair in red, brunette, blonde or raven, short and sassy or long and seductive.

Gil Elvgren, “Gentlemen Prefer…?”, 1963

Pin-ups are gorgeous. Idealized, stylized and perfect. But I don’t have any problem with this portrayal of women. The fact is, I adore pin-up art (I’ve even done a little pin-up creating myself) almost as much as I enjoy a fine art masterpiece by Caravaggio or Da Vinci.

The pin-up girl exudes this wonderful sense of play that’s shrouded in a light haze of mystery. She’s subtle sexy. I’m not a fan of partial or full-on nudity in pin-ups. (Be forewarned, there’s a bit of nudity ahead.) Part of what makes pin-up art so alluring is that the girls are covered up. There’s much to be said for leaving a little something to the imagination. If you give the whole show away, what is there to stick around for?

Fortunately, a good majority of pin-up art shies away from bare breasts and bottoms. In my opinion, a lot of stunning pin-up images are ruined by nudity, like these otherwise beautiful works by famous pin-up artists Fritz Willis (center) and Alberto Vargas:

And these are just mild examples of nudity. We can find many examples of full nudes, especially in Vargas’ pin-up portfolio.

Pin-up art was at its height during the 1940s and 50s, with artists producing these exquisitely suggestive images for magazines and advertisements. Each artist had his own style (though as you’ll see throughout this post, some artists showed distinct similarities), and looking back on the pin-up girls today, it’s not that difficult to tell which artist created what girls.

Bill Randall

The mid-twentieth century produced a number of extremely talented artists whose main focus was the gorgeous pin-up girl: Alberto Vargas, Gil Elvgren, Fritz Willis, Pearl Frush, Lou Shabner, Ben Hur Baz, Al Buell, Al Moore, Vaughan Bass, Edward Runci, Joseph F. DeMartini, Bill Randall, Knute “KO” Munson, Freeman Elliot, Earl MacPherson, Art Frahm, and the list goes on.

My favourite pin-up: Gil Elvgren, “The Right Touch”, 1958

But no matter the artist, all pin-up girls have one thing in common: they embody the fantasy of catching a glimpse of what you’re really not supposed to see.

~ Alberto Vargas ~

Peruvian painter, Alberto Vargas (February 9, 1896 – December 30, 1982), is probably the most well known of all the great pin-up artists. Although not my personal favourite, he has been referred to as THE greatest pin-up artist by many, both in and out of the art world.

There’s no questioning his talent. His perfectly blended gradations of colour are the result of using an airbrush. You’d be hard pressed to find noticeable brush strokes on a Vargas piece. His ladies have a smooth softness about them that other pin-up artists have failed to replicate. Precision and minute details are trademark Vargas.

Some have tried though, and one artist in particular, came close. Joseph F. De Martini’s watercolour and airbrushed pin-ups are very similar in style to Vargas. Which isn’t all that surprising considering the two were friends and associates.

But even with the similarities, for the most part, it’s difficult to mistake one man’s work for the other’s. Vargas was a much better technical artist than De Martini, and his girls are more well developed and three-dimensional – they have more depth. The shadows are darker, the highlights are brighter. When you view their work side by side, the differences are easy to spot.

Alberto Vargas Girls

Joseph DeMartini

~ Gil Elvgren ~

Gil Elvgren, “Spotty Performance (Occupational Hazard; Stenographer)”, 1962

Gil Elvgren (March 15, 1914 – February 29, 1980) is responsible for painting literally hundreds of pin-ups. And he is, to me, the greatest and most important pin-up artist who ever lived. His girls are hands down my favourites. They’re classy, sexy, and many are cleverly named to reflect the scenes they’re painted in. The colours are bright and vibrant, and the girls are beautifully rendered with soft, touchable hair, and luscious curves.

Gil Elvgren, “Jeanette”, 1962

 There is no mistaking an Elvgren pin-up. Unlike some of his famous counterparts (like Vargas), Elvgren worked in oils, not watercolour, which is what gives his paintings so much depth and substance. His girls are very well developed and have an opulent, glamourous tone, while never losing their sense of whimsy and play.

A huge percentage of Elvgren’s girls are adorned with the quintessential sexy accessory: dark thigh-high stockings and garter straps.

But regardless of attire, what makes a pin-up truly sexy is her demeanour and the tone of the scene she’s in. And that is why you DON’T need nudity in a pin-up to make it work. It’s that little twinkle in her eye, the look of surprise on her pretty face; it’s what she’s doing, and just that HINT of skin peeking out from under her skirt. She’s begging to be touched, and yet… she’s a work of art. And everyone knows you don’t touch a work of art. You appreciate and admire its beauty from afar.

There are two other artists whose work was clearly influenced by Elvgren’s style: Edward Runci (left) and Forest H. Clough (1910 – 1985) (right).

At a quick glance, you might be tempted to attribute both girls (also rendered in oils) to Mr. Elvgren’s talented hand. But upon closer inspection, you’ll notice the differences. Runci captures the voluminous glow of the skin, and his pin-up has an Elvgren-like well-developed face and alluring bedroom eyes. But notice how stiff she looks. Her posture, the pose, the angle of her arm. Even the drape of the fabric is in competition with the softness of her hair and face. And her body is a bit underdeveloped, with her forearms, hands and legs being less finished looking than her chest and shoulders. While she might be sexy, she’s really not very inviting.

Clough’s french maid has a gorgeous set of legs. Long and lean, with shadows and highlights in all the right places to accentuate her calves. But take a look at the rough-edged brush strokes throughout the piece. The lack of smooth, transitional blending between the black dress and the white highlights. And how harsh her lovely features appear. Overall, the work has a “choppy” appearance and lacks Elvgren’s smooth finesse.

~ Fritz Willis ~

Fritz Willis (1907 – January 13, 1979) has a unique style. Unlike the other artists I’ve mentioned so far, Willis’ pin-ups possess a much more understated beauty. The colours are more muted and the overall effect is very soft. He too worked mostly in oils, but at first glance, you might mistake the medium for pastels. For some of his earlier pin-ups, Fritz worked in a medium called gouache. This is a mix-it-yourself type of paint, similar to watercolour, but with additives to make the paint less transparent and more opaque.

Fritz Willis

His paintings have a sort of smeared quality about them, (especially the fabric in his backgrounds), which is similar to the appearance pastels give. Everything is very soft, airy and ethereal looking. And this effect works so nicely because his figures are still well-developed and finely rendered. There’s nothing “sloppy” about Willis’ pin-ups. Wispy brush strokes and a feathery glow help make his girls more beauty than bombshell. And unlike Elvgren’s lively, playful pin-ups, Willis’ girls are more subdued and relaxed, which is what really sets them apart from other pin-up art.

Fritz Willis

~ Duane Bryers ~

I should point out that not every great pin-up artist conformed to the typical standard of female beauty. Another of my favourite pin-up artists is Duane Bryers, whose beloved plus-size, red-headed pin-up girl, Hilda, will steal your heart.

Duane Bryers

Often portrayed in silly, awkward, or precarious positions, Hilda is the unconventional pin-up girl.

Sweet and sassy, this plump, cheeky, fiery-haired missy was the calendar queen of the 1950s. A little on the clumsy side but bubbling with charm, Hilda has been portrayed doing countless things: from dozing in the shade to piloting a sailboat, panning for gold, swimming and watermelon-eating, and unhappily painting a picture in the rain.

What a delightfully refreshing take on pin-ups! This a-typical beauty had confidence, often sporting nothing more than a bikini made of flowers, that were often falling off thanks to her playful antics. Bryer’s style was colourful and vibrant, which complemented Hilda’s personality perfectly. Of all the pin-up girls, Hilda best illustrates the importance of personality in a piece. Hilda has a soul and you can catch a little glimpse of it in every scene Bryers painted her in. She comes to life. And that’s what makes the difference between just a painting and a work of art.

Duane Bryers

Pin-ups have become something of a lost art. Yes, you can find artists today who will paint you a pin-up girl and do a darn good job of her, but artists specializing in pin-ups? As far as I know, there really aren’t any. But it makes sense. The job of classic pin-up art was to sell products. And in today’s electronic digital age, there isn’t much call for hand-painted advertising. And what a terrible shame that is.

Pearl Frush

Thankfully we have the works of these exceptional artists to look back on. The pin-up girl will live on. Their beauty is timeless, their appeal continues to span generations. I don’t look at these lovely ladies as derogatory or sexist, but I appreciate them for the beauty and talent they represent. It’s ART.

The world’s love affair with the art of the pin-up is still going strong. And so is mine.

A beautiful woman delights the eye; a wise woman, the understanding; a pure one, the soul.

~ Minna Antrim

And who says a woman can’t be all three?

Sex sells.

This is a sad fact of life. But while this may be true, when it comes to art, what sells isn’t always what’s best for business.

I’d like to elaborate a bit on a particular point I made in my last post, “The Art of the Pin-up“: That nudity in pin-ups is not only unnecessary, but that it also takes away from the sexiness of the girl.

It’s one thing to understand a concept. I can tell you that clothed pin-up girls are sexier than nude ones. Then I can list all my reasons explaining my point of view. I’ll say that everyone loves a good mystery. That it’s more enjoyable to wonder what’s under her skirt than to just have the goods paraded in front of you.

But sometimes you really need to SEE something to truly get it. You need to witness the concept executed in a practical way. So instead of just telling you that nude pin-ups aren’t as sexy, I’m going to SHOW you.

Here is a classic pin-up girl by Alberto Vargas. A blushing bride nonetheless. And she should be blushing with her breast exposed like that. Technically speaking, this is a gorgeous painting. The girl is beautifully rendered with long, lean legs, slender fingers, and brilliant blue eyes. Her veil is creating a lovely, subtle backdrop for her perfect body, painted with less detail so that the cloth isn’t competing with the main focus of the piece — the girl herself.

Vargas was a true artist. There’s no denying his talent. This painting is breathtaking. From her detailed bridal bouquet and shoes, to her diamond earrings; the soft pinks and whites of the fabric, to the peachy glow of her skin, and the deliciously contrasting black of her hair… it’s a masterpiece.

But as we’re taking in the piece in all its subtle glory, suddenly we become aware of the elephant in the room. That breast. That breast that, for all intents and purposes, shouldn’t be visible.

Study her posture and the position her body is in. Think about the anatomy of the female body and you’ll realize how awkward and unnatural it is for her to be sitting this way, with her breasts straddling her leg. Can she actually sit like this? Yes, but it’s not something that a woman would do naturally. And how simple would it have been to have her breast covered by her leg? It would make more sense, AND it would look better, my bias against nudity aside.

Right here we have the perfect example of something I hate: Gratuitous nudity. Vargas is baring her breast not because it makes sense for the pin-up, but simply because he can. It’s completely forced. It’s one thing to have a nude pin-up that would require a prop or a piece of clothing to hide the nudity. But it’s quite another thing when the pin-up is in prime position to have her lady parts strategically hidden (a key to good composition in this type of art) … and you create a way to show them off regardless.

As I looked at this pin-up, it was so obvious to me that simply covering that breast would take the piece from “eh” to “Wow”. And in an effort to show all of you, I did just that. Here is Vargas’ pin-up with a little alteration.

Now, for my money? THIS is sexy.

This to me, is what a pin-up should be. “Subtle sexy”, as I said in the previous post. The point of pin-up art is to tease the viewer. Pin-ups are not porn. You admire a pin-up girl, you don’t drool over her. She’s not a centerfold. She’s a work of art. To be savoured, not salivated over.

Such a small change, but it makes a world of difference. Pin-ups are about the thrill of the chase. Of getting that little glimpse that makes you want more. Just a bit, not TOO much, but just enough. We can still see her breast, but not all of it. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but it’s my opinion that the covered version is sexier than the original.

So what do you think? To bare, or not to bare? That’s the breast, er, best question of all.

Preliminary sketch for self portrait, 2008

When I was younger, pencil was my preferred medium. I liked to sketch. And I wasn’t all that interested in painting. In fact, let me be honest – I abhorred the idea of being a “painter”.

One day during my early years in high school, I decided to stop at the local art shop and make a few inquiries about how to get my work sold there in the future. I left extremely discouraged because the owner basically told me that pencil sketches weren’t really a saleable medium. That most people wanted colour on their walls.

This was quite the predicament. I had painted a few things before, but it wasn’t what I wanted to do. I wanted to sketch. In pencil.

So what’s a 15-year-old girl to do when all of her carefully thought out career plans seemingly evaporate before her eyes?

Adapt.

Learn something new.

And get on with your life.

Make it work and get where you want to be.

I’m not entirely sure when it happened, but at some point, the idea of painting was no longer so despicable. I’m sure much of that change of heart came about because I realized that the store owner was probably right. That if I truly wanted to earn a living doing art, that maybe I had to sacrifice a little bit. But not too much. That’s the key to being successful AND happy – knowing what to give up, and what to hold your ground on.

Grade 12 was when it really started falling into place for me. I was 17. My final exam project was a major affair. A series of works which depicted an intangible quality or feeling, in a tangible way. Ooo, symbolism, eh? This was perfect for me, and I knew exactly what I wanted to do.

My teacher*, God bless her, often didn’t see eye-to-eye with me. And what did we clash over most? My subject choice. After turning in the following series of sketches, she caught me one day going out the door and said, “Wendy, I think you put too much religious emphasis in your art. You need to do something else.”

No one knew it, but she flipped a switch that day. I was angry that anyone would dare say such a thing to ME. I’ve always been “WendyLovesJesus”, even before I formally adopted that moniker when I joined Twitter in 2011. It was never a secret that there was nothing more important to me than my love of Jesus. In Grade 11, I turned out my martyrs altar piece. I was known for being the smart, artsy Christian girl, and now here I was a year later, and someone was telling me to stop what I loved doing and what made me, well, ME.

Martyrs Altarpiece, 2002

*smiles patronizingly*

I nodded and listened and walked away. And then I swore to myself that I would NEVER stop. Too much religious emphasis? How about not enough? It stoked a fire that had been living in me since the day I was born.

Shortly after that encounter, it was time to decide what my final project would be. What did I want to do? Simply put, I wanted to illustrate Bible stories. To fit with the criteria set out, I chose to do a series of paintings which depicted God’s love. You can’t SEE love, but you can “see” it. And that’s exactly what I did.

Bible Miracles Paintings, 2004: “Jesus Heals the Blind Man”, “Daniel in the Lions’ Den”, “The Ultimate Sacrifice”, “Abraham’s Test”, “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the Fiery Furnace”

There was an exhibition of all the works held in the school library and I got to stage my paintings with open Bibles, a red curtain, candles and dim lighting.

It was my attempt to recreate the atmosphere I’d experienced a year and a half earlier during a visit to the Royal Ontario Museum. “Images of Salvation” was a special exhibition of works from The Vatican and other Italian collections. And it was absolutely glorious. It was also the place where I supposedly walked right past Michelangelo’s Pieta and didn’t even notice it. Lord have mercy on me, a wretched, disgustingly unobservant sinner.

My paintings were a hit, even with my teacher. She never said one word about wishing I’d done something else. She told me she was proud of me. And I got a fantastic mark and an art award (two, actually) a few months later at graduation.

January 27, 2004

This experience taught me a valuable lesson: It’s important that you find something in life that you’re truly passionate about. Something you can get behind and push forward with. Something you’re willing to give 110% to for the rest of your life. Something that you love. Knowing when to give a little to better yourself is important. But it’s also important to recognize the areas you need to stand firm on.

I wanted a career in art, and I needed to adapt and evolve. Today, I can’t even imagine going back to just sketching in pencil. I’m known for my colour work now. Vibrant colour is one of the things that sets me apart from a lot of other artists. I’d have done myself a great disservice had I dug in my heels and refused to try painting in a more serious manner. Turned out I had a talent for it. And now I wouldn’t give up my brush and palette for anything.

Wendy Brydge, “Messiah”, 2012

That was a necessary change in what I was doing. But devoting the majority of my time and skill to illustrating religious subjects? That I wasn’t about to abandon. It’s what makes me who I am, what I am, WHY I am. I paint a lot of things, but Bible symbolism is what I’m passionate about. That’s what makes me excited, that’s what I love to do.

Wendy Brydge, “Armageddon”, 2012

Do what you love and you’ll love what you do. There’s much truth in that.

The year after I graduated high school, I went back to that little art shop, one of my own pieces in tow. It was, in fact, a framed print of the above “Jesus Heals the Blind Man”. I had never seen any religious works in her shop, but hey, the worst that could happen was that she’d say no, she didn’t want it.

And she almost did. Gave me a big spiel about how religious art doesn’t sell, there’s no market for it, at least around here. And space is at a premium, you know! Can’t take just any painting that walks in off the street. I wasn’t about to beg, so I simply said that if she wasn’t interested it was no problem, I’d look elsewhere. She took it with the stipulation that if it didn’t sell within a month, that I was to come and retrieve it or it would go in the garbage. And she was emphatic that I not get my hopes up – it wasn’t going to sell.

Well. Okay.

A month goes by and I hear nothing. Six weeks pass and I realize I’d better go and get the darn thing. I look around at the shop and it’s not there. Seeing what was most likely a look of panic wash over my face, an employee asked if I needed help with something. You can imagine my surprise when after explaining about my piece, she laughed and informed me that it sold the first week it was out on display.

I was regaled with a wonderful story about an out-of-town woman who walked in and fell in love with it. Couldn’t stop looking at it, wanted to own it badly. She came back a few days later with her spouse, and they both were head over heels. Bought it, said some very nice things about it, and me, and it was gone. As this was my first “real” sale, you can imagine how delighted I was to hear all of this.

I won’t bore you with details of my anger at the store owner for not contacting me when it sold; or of the insane amount of time it took for me to finally get paid; OR the fact that she failed to honour the commission and price we agreed upon. Chalk all that up to a valuable learning experience and a lesson that people can’t be trusted.

But it sold! Somewhere out there in the world, a Wendy Brydge was hanging on a wall, being admired and appreciated – what every artists wants. And to top it all off, it was a picture depicting something about Jesus. Hallelujah!

Preliminary sketch for “Jesus Heals the Blind Man”, 2003

I’ve learned that your life is what you make it. Don’t let other people lead you down paths you don’t want to go down, down paths you don’t belong on. Don’t take “advice” from just anyone. You’ll know what’s right when you come across it. You’ll feel it. And you’ll know what’s wrong too. Whether it’s your career, your love life, your friendships… pay attention. Don’t ignore that feeling. Listen. Listen and you might find that God is speaking to you, trying to steer you in the right direction and more importantly, away from the wrong one.

Find what makes you happy and then strive to hold onto it; to get better, to do better, to be better. Money, position, power, fame… all of it’s meaningless if you aren’t happy. And God didn’t say we couldn’t be happy.

As Kenny Rogers sang, “You gotta know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away, and know when to run…” So true in all aspects of life. Whether you’re dealing with people, or with paint on a brush: Adapt where you need to, but hold on to what’s important, to what makes you happy, to what you love.

* * *

*Just for fun, I’d like to point out that this is the woman who told me there were only two men in my life – Jesus and Dracula. (See my bio on the side of this page.) Even now it amazes me how well that sums me up!

All of my fellow Seekers of Truth know that my interests are broad and far-reaching. My blog is made up of, dare I say, an incredible variety of topics.

Today is the two-year anniversary of “Seeker of Truth”. That’s right. On April 28, 2012, I introduced myself, pulled up a chair, and started writing. And I’ve spent the last two years blogging about many of my favourite things. But in 45 posts, I’ve never once covered my two favourite topics at the same time: Art and Jesus.

Jesus + Art = Me

If people could be broken down into a mere equation, that’s me right there. I have always loved paintings that depict Bible stories, Bible symbolism, and anything to do with Christ our Lord.

So what better way to celebrate the start of my third blogging year than by highlighting and discussing some of my favourite paintings of Jesus.

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit.

~ 1 Peter 3:18

***

The painting that absolutely tops my list is Caravaggio’s “The Incredulity of Saint Thomas”.

This painting speaks to me like no other. It is the most beautiful painting I’ve ever seen. The work was completed in 1602 and now hangs in the Sanssouci Palace in Potsdam, Germany. It’s my favourite painting in the entire world and the only one I must see in person before I die.

Caravaggio was THE master of chiaroscuro – the modelling of light and dark – and there is no better example of that than this piece. The scene illustrates John 20:24-29, and Caravaggio has captured the most important part – the instant Thomas believes: “Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in His hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” Then He said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

I’m simply in awe of the range of emotions that Caravaggio has managed to play across Thomas’ face. You can see his disbelief turn to shock and then realization. It’s subtle yet entirely obvious at the same time. Perhaps there’s even a twinge of guilt and shame hidden there; regret for his doubting.

The artist has breathed life into this painting. You can “hear” this piece – it’s very quiet. Caravaggio has put us in that room with Jesus and the disciples; we feel what they feel. And that is the mark of a true artist: The one who can draw the viewer in that they might actually take part in the scene.

In 1951, eccentric surrealist painter Salvador Dali introduced the world to his stunning painting, “Christ of Saint John of the Cross”.

The highly unusual perspective is what sets Dali’s painting apart from all others. The first time I saw this piece, I was mesmerized. Said Dali: “In the first place, in 1950, I had a ‘cosmic dream’ in which I saw this image in colour and which in my dream represented the ‘nucleus of the atom.’ This nucleus later took on a metaphysical sense; I considered it ‘the very unity of the universe,’ the Christ!”

Dali was inspired by this “from above” sketch of Jesus, done by the Spanish Saint John of the Cross (hence the painting’s title), some time between 1574 and 1577.

Much controversy surrounds Dali’s work, but I prefer to ignore politics and conjecture. I just appreciate it as one of the most endearingly peaceful depictions of the crucifixion that exists today.

Something very exciting happened in 2011. This next magnificent painting was identified as Da Vinci’s depiction of Jesus Christ – the “Salvator Mundi”. It is the first Leonardo to be accepted by scholars in more than a century.

“Salvator Mundi” simply means “Saviour of the World”, and is most often a depiction of Christ with His right hand raised and His left hand holding a globe/orb.

I love Da Vinci’s work, and my heart was all aflutter when this piece was declared to be Leonardo’s lost painting of Christ. There is a softness to Da Vinci’s work that I find quite calming and pleasant to look at. It’s both his gentle handling of the paint and the muted colours he uses that create this effect. This is one of my favourites of all his paintings, and I believe, one of the finest examples of his work.

This is a very majestic and regal looking Christ. But what I really like about it is that Da Vinci has somehow captured a look of both innocence and infinite wisdom in Jesus. This Jesus causes a stirring in my soul unlike any other. He seems completely unassuming, yet at the same time commands attention and respect. It’s this expertly executed juxtaposition that makes me want to reach out and touch the painting. It’s so beautifully rendered.

Another artist whose work has an inherently ethereal glow to it is William Adolphe Bouguereau. There are many examples of his gorgeous religious works, but here are two of my favourites.

This first painting, “The Flagellation of Christ”, was done in 1880. Bouguereau paints moments that are seemingly frozen in time. His hyperrealistic style captures the emotion of a single instant, giving his paintings an eerie yet intriguing atmosphere and creating an almost three-dimensional illusion. When I look at this painting, I feel as if I could actually walk through this scene, in and around the people, to take it all in.

Also by Bouguereau, the title of this piece says it all: “Compassion”. Completed in 1897, this is a painting the artist loved so much that he kept it for himself. It was donated by his descendants in 2009 to the Musée D’Orsay in Paris, France.

The painting shows not only this man’s compassion for Christ, but more importantly Christ’s compassion for him, and by extension, all of us. He made the ultimate sacrifice – He gave His own life that we might believe and be saved. “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” ~ John 15:13

This final painting has always been my favourite depiction of Jesus. Warner Sallman’s “The Head of Christ”, 1941.

I’d be lying if I said I knew for sure why this particular version of Christ is so special to me. Artistically speaking, the strong highlights really set off the earth-toned palette of the painting, creating an enveloping richness. As a result, there is a warmth to this piece that’s nearly tangible. Jesus’ expression is calm and stoic, and yet the artist has conveyed such kindness in His face. Like Da Vinci’s Jesus above, this is another example of how a face can display seemingly conflicting characteristics if it’s modelled by the right artist.

As much as I adore all of these paintings and many more just like them, there is one thing that’s always bothered me a bit about the way Jesus is depicted in beating/crucifixion scenes. He’s often so unmarked. There’s very little blood or evidence of trauma. While I can appreciate this aesthetic choice (it’s quite possibly made to emphasize His most recognizable wounds – palms, feet and side), when it came time to paint my own version of Jesus, Isaiah 52:14 kept pinging around in my mind. “… his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being and his form marred beyond human likeness…”

I’m also a big fan of Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ”, and what I liked most about that film was that there was absolutely nothing glamourous or made-up about it. That was a much more true-to-life depiction of our Lord than any other I’ve ever seen.

I completed “Jesus Crucified” in 2008, and for me, seeing Him bruised and bloodied just feels more appropriate.

I certainly won’t say that the other less gruesome portrayals are bad, definitely not. But I do feel that you lose the impact of what Christ actually did for us when the brutality of the whole affair is repressed. And in my opinion, when it comes to art, the message always takes precedence over aesthetics.

But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

~ Isaiah 53:5

Art is many things. It’s a way to document the importance of the past, and it can capture the essence of a moment in the here and now. Through art you can communicate ideas, morals and attitudes, and it’s a way to preserve beauty and history.

And for me, there is nothing more beautiful and worthy of remembrance than my Lord Jesus.

You don’t need to visit the local art gallery to see some incredible works of art. Two years ago I wrote “The Art of Horror” — a blog post that highlighted the lost art of illustrated film posters.

It wasn’t until the 1980s that illustrated movie posters really started to fall out of vogue. And such a shame that they did too. In my previous post, I focused on posters and artists from Hollywood’s Golden Age. But this time, I’m going to dive head first into a pool of glorious Technicolour — the posters of Hammer Films.

From the late 50’s through the 70’s, the British production company was well known for its love and use of bright colour, scantily clad bodies, lavish sets, and often garish special effects. And you know what? I loved every bit of it. And if you don’t? Something’s seriously the matter with you. ;P

Not surprisingly, the posters commissioned to sell said films are equally impressive and recognizable. While horror was Hammer’s forte, some of their best posters are from non-horror films. So let’s begin with my favourite.

Regular readers of my blog know that I’m crazy about pin-up art, and that’s pretty much what this is. Rachel Welch and Ursula Andress were real-life pin-ups at the time. And it’s a good thing Andress looks so fantastic in this poster, because her acting was below sub-par in the film. Just terrible. But Tim Chantrell’s illustration for this double-billing is exquisite.

The poster is from 1966, the year “One Million Years B.C.” was released. “She” came out the previous year. Everyone’s taste is different, but for me, this poster is perfection. The colours are bright and vibrant, and although the piece is divided right down the middle, Chantrell was careful to choose a complementary colour palette for each film.

To my eye, nothing is more pleasing than symmetry. But perfect symmetry can be boring. True artist that he is, Chantrell kept symmetry in the layout, but then tweaked each individual component to keep it visually interesting. An equal-sized portion of the poster has been devoted to each film. The placement of the movie titles is the same on both sides, and the colour is the same. Each actress’s name is done in the same font, and is the same size. And we have a text border at both the top and the bottom. There’s what makes up the perfect symmetry.

But then Chantrell does a little tweaking to add visual appeal. The title fonts while similar, are different. And though each girl takes up the same amount of space towards the center of the poster, each is striking a different pose. Now take a peek at the backgrounds behind them. Again, the layout is nearly a mirror image, but Chantrell uses colour to break up the monotony. To me, this is THE best poster that Hammer ever produced. It’s perfection in both visual appeal and design theory. I would most certainly hang this on my wall as a legitimate work of art.

Manchester artist Tom Chantrell is responsible for many of Hammer’s film posters. Hundreds of posters (not just for Hammer) can be attributed to his hand. Another example of his work for Hammer is this fabulous 1966 double-bill poster for “Rasputin: The Mad Monk” and “The Reptile”.

This poster has a special place in Hammer’s history. It marks the first time the company branded themselves as “The House of Horror”.

Chantrell’s work for 1968’s “The Lost Continent” has a nice vintage vibe to it. The colours are muted, but all the better to showcase his wonderfully detailed illustration. Not to mention appeal to a slightly older audience. People who are interested in a little substance rather than just an over-indulgent flash in the pan (which, let’s be honest, is exactly what most Hammer films were).

This is a picture you’d expect to see in an old adventure book that your grandpa had when he was a boy. And that’s the point, really. The purpose of a movie poster is to pique people’s interest enough that they’ll pay to see the film. So a good poster artist knows how to capture his audience’s attention. In this case, he’s appealing to their sense of nostalgia and adventure. “The Lost Continent” is more suspense with a hint of mystery than it is horror, and the image on this poster does an excellent job of drawing you in. Everything about this tells me he’s trying to appeal to an older generation of viewers. My favourite thing about this poster is how Chantrell has incorporated a lot of movement. The boat is sitting up out of the water, and the octopus/kraken’s tentacles are flailing around. It’s a masterpiece.

Another beautifully illustrated poster is this one for 1970’s “When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth”.

“Enter an age of unknown terrors, pagan worship and virgin sacrifices.” Well, if that doesn’t scream Hammer, I don’t know what does.

Here’s an interesting one. This is the Italian poster for “Frankenstein Created Woman”, 1967.

Different posters were designed for a film’s distribution in other countries. And I’ve found that oftentimes, I prefer the foreign release posters to the domestic ones. The composition of this piece is what sells it for me. You’ve got one dominant, stationary subject in the foreground, illuminated and brightly coloured so that she stands out, but still complements the background. Your eye is drawn around the entire picture thanks to that bright spot above the castle and Peter Cushing’s likeness’s striking red eyes. This poster just LOOKS good.

As does this interesting French/Dutch version of the same film.

An exceptional example of fine art-quality illustration is this double-billing of “Frankenstein and the Monster From Hell”/”The Fists of Vengeance” poster by Bill Wiggins.

Just look at those hands on the creature! And it’s one tiny detail that takes this piece from good to great. The one finger coming in front of the movie’s title, which gives you the wonderful 3-dimensional illusion that the monster is reaching out to grab at you. Strong shadows on his hands also help to pull them into the foreground.

Another great foreign release poster is this Italian version of “Horror of Frankenstein” (1970).

This reminds me a little of Karoly Grosz’s poster for 1932’s “Murders in the Rue Morgue”. One of my favourites in “The Art of Horror” post. The best thing about Hammer’s posters is the same thing that made their films stand out so much — colour. Colour can do so much for a work of art. It can also ruin a piece if you choose the wrong colours. But these posters have so much life in them. They’re vibrant and bold, just like Hammer’s films are. And I think it’s wonderful that in the case of Hammer, the poster art represents the film art so well.

The final poster is for “The Curse of the Werewolf” (1961). A fun piece that’s once again the perfect balance of colour, content and layout. I really like when there’s room for a little written introduction right on the poster.

You’ll notice that some posters are in the traditional portrait style (the height is greater than the width), but there are also these fantastic landscape ones too. This wasn’t always the case. Between about 1910 – 1935, most British film posters were based on the traditional Victorian theatre-poster layout — portrait style, roughly 40″x30″ — and similar to the American “One-Sheet” movie poster format which was 41″x27″. This was good because it meant that US posters could be imported directly into the UK, or the designs could at least be easily adapted with few changes to British-printed posters. But in 1936, UK distributor the Gaumont-British Picture Corporation changed the face of film posters forever when they introduced the 30″x40″ “Quad Crown” landscape layout. The public loved this new style, and by the end of the decade, everyone in Britain was using it.

This was a major breakthrough for British artists because it meant that poster designs coming in from the US were no longer easily compatible with the new British format of poster. And this opened the door for designing entirely new and different artwork for foreign films coming into Britain. What a momentous day in the history of art! It’s not uncommon to see three, four, or an even greater number of different poster designs for one film.

A variety of posters for Hammer’s “Dracula A.D. 1972″ (1972)

And I say, the more art there is to enjoy, the better! Especially when it’s Hammer.

So why don’t you go look up one of these fantastic Hammer films and get comfortable on the couch? Halloween is just around the corner, and you know what that means… more creepy horror-themed blog posts to come…

Until next time, unpleasant dreams . . .

^..^

Teaching art is like teaching mathematics or anything else. There are certain basic principles which anyone can learn. You can teach anyone to draw and paint, but you can’t make them an artist.

 ~ Bill Mosby

Were he still alive, pin-up artist extraordinaire Gil Elvgren would be 101 years old today. Born in Saint Paul, Minnesota on March 15, 1914, Elvgren was a true master in the art world. His career began in the mid-1930s and lasted more than forty years. Dubbed “The Norman Rockwell of Cheesecake”, his pin-up girls still grace calendars to this very day.

The 2015 Gil Elvgren Pin-ups Calendar — on my bedroom wall right now!

Elvgren is best remembered for his beautiful pin-up girls, but they were certainly not his only claim to fame. Much of his work was in the world of advertising. Magazine illustrations, catalogue covers, and a cornucopia of popular advertisements for Coca-Cola (just to name a few) make Elvgren’s professional résumé an impressive one.

One of Elvgren’s early ads for Coca-Cola

The up-and-coming artist’s big break came only weeks after his first commission (a series of fashion catalogue covers) — Elvgren was hired by calendar company Brown & Bigelow to paint a portrait of the original child-stars, the Canadian-born Dionne Quintuplets. The painting was first published for a Brown & Bigelow calendar in 1937 and it made him an overnight success.

Gil Elvgren, “The Dionne Quintuplets”, 1937

Gil also worked for B&B’s largest competitor, the Louis F. Dow Calendar Company, which is where his pin-up work truly began. While these early-years pin-ups aren’t among my personal favourites, it’s still not hard to see why Elvgren’s work was quickly growing in demand.

During World War II, he was asked by General Electric to do some work for their War Effort campaign. Elvgren’s illustrations (and not just pin-up girls) proved a valuable source of morale and encouragement for the troops as well as those left at home.

Gil Elvgren, “She Knows What Freedom Really Means”, appeared in Good Housekeeping, June 1942

He is a fine painter; as a draftsman there are few who can equal him. He has amazing hands. They don’t look like the hands of an artist. He’s built like a football player, and a pencil is almost buried in that paw of his, but the touch he has and the subtle variations he is capable of can only be compared to the sensitive skill of a great surgeon.

~ Bill Mosby on Gil Elvgren

In 1944, Brown & Bigelow offered Elvgren the opportunity to work for the company as a staff artist. From 1945 until his retirement in 1972, Elvgren worked for B&B. The arrangement meant that he could continue illustrating for magazines and doing advertising work for Coca-Cola. He also had the freedom to accept any other advertising assignments so long as they didn’t conflict with his B&B work.

Charlie Ward, president of Brown & Bigelow, played a large part in making Elvgren’s name and style immediately recognizable. He marketed “Gil Elvgren” — not just his art, but the artist himself. Elvgren’s work would not be confined to calendars, magazines and billboards. His pin-ups took on a life of their own, appearing on things like decks of cards and lamp shades. B&B even manufactured a fabulous Elvgren Girl plastic letter opener in 1958.

There’s no question that Gil Elvgren knew what went into making a beautiful woman. In 1951, Modern Man magazine did a feature story on the artist and asked what he thought about American women. “[They are] infinitely smarter today. They are more beautiful than ever before. They are more natural. They are not tying themselves like they used to. And they are not looking like boys any more, thank God.”

“A Warm Welcome”, 1959

I think it’s every artist’s dream to be successful in his own lifetime. Elvgren is one of the few artists in history who did just that. He was in such great demand that he had to turn down, dare I say, most of the work he was being offered.

“The Pick of the Picnic!” Schmidt Lithograph Corp., 1950

I would venture to say that nearly every artist at the time was inspired by Gil Elvgren’s incredible work. And I believe his paintings will continue to inspire for generations to come. He was a master in every sense of the word. His pin-up girls are perfection. Beautiful, fun, and most importantly, full of life. Every Elvgren girl possesses a vibrant personality all her own — an intangible quality that most artists fail to reproduce in their work.

“Blanket Coverage (And Now’s the Time to See if Frozen Assets Can Be Thawed)”, 1952

Elvgren is to me the greatest artist of the 20th century; not just an illustrator, but an artist. This is how Clair Fry, art director at Brown & Bigelow, described the artist and man Gil Elvgren in a 1950s Figure Quarterly magazine interview.

“Gil is one of the most able draftsmen and painters in the commercial field. That, actually, is only a small part of the story. There are many able draftsmen and painters who have never risen above complete obscurity. I suppose, considering the difference, it is like two men, each having a fine set of carpenter’s tools, the tools being comparable in every respect; one of them has a clear-cut plan of the house he is going to build in his mind, while the other man with equally fine equipment, works without that clearly defined understanding of an objective.

Gil has excellent taste. That is a commodity hard to come by. Many artists with great ability never are accepted because line and pattern, excellent though they may be from the literal point of view, add up to an effect that is clumsy, dull, and lacking that particular essential which in real life makes one particular girl stand out in sharp contrast to the great average.

“Playmate (Playful Mood)”, 1960

Gil also has wit. Not only in his situations having a humourous turn, but even more in the ingenuity and inventiveness shown in his colour schemes, poses, gestures, and all that goes into a lively, exciting statement that captures universal attention. His work is sincere and very honest. The reaction to Gil’s paintings is that here is a real girl. The carefully thought out gestures and expressions are done with such mastery that they convey the exact meaning Gil intended without the phoney quality that exists in such a vast percentage of commercial painting.

“Nature Girl (Something For Netting?)”, 1956

Gil has his finger on the pulse of the current evaluation of feminine beauty. This is a most important factor. If you look at the pictures of pretty women from Rubens on, you find a distinct change in the yardstick of various eras as to what is and what isn’t beauty. Gil knows exactly what the ingredients are to touch the fancy of that judgement at this moment. Maybe, when everything else has been said, that knowledge and the ability to translate it is the most important factor in Gil’s outstanding success.”

And what an outstanding success he was. Happy birthday to one of the greatest artists the world will ever know. I think that in many ways, Gil Elvgren was himself the true work of art.

Note: Header image is Elvgren’s illustration for the story “So It’s Dreams You Want” which appeared in McCall’s magazine, March 1946.

“The Starry Night” (1889)

For my part, I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.

The above is a quote from Dutch Post-Impressionist painter, Vincent Van Gogh. One of the world’s most tragic artists was born on this day in 1853. In his short and troubled 37-year life, Van Gogh saw no recognition as an artist, selling only a single painting before he died. A man at constant war with his demons, he shot himself in the chest on July 27, 1890, and took his final breath in the arms of his beloved brother, Theo, two days later.

As we advance in life it becomes more and more difficult, but in fighting the difficulties, the inmost strength of the heart is developed.

It’s sadly ironic that the artist who was so plagued with darkness is known by his cheerful, bright, vibrantly coloured paintings.

He went from absolute obscurity in life to one of the world’s most celebrated artists in death. After Rembrandt, Van Gogh is considered the greatest Dutch painter.

“The Church at Auvers-sur-Oise” (1890)

I’ll be honest — I’m not entirely sure why I’m writing this blog post today. I’m not exactly a “fan” of Vincent Van Gogh’s work, and for the most part, I detest any type of art that’s labeled “impressionist”, “abstract”, “expressionist” or any of the movements associated with them. Call me conventional, call me classical/traditional, call me boring. I don’t care. To me, “art” requires a certain level of talent and skill, and no one will ever convince me that something like Jackson Pollock’s “Number 5, 1948” deserves any attention, recognition, or admiration.

“Still Life with Bible” (1885)

I’m not a fan of Paul Gauguin, Pablo Picasso, or Claude Monet. Though I will say that Picasso’s early traditional paintings are beautiful. His father was an art instructor, and he learned to draw and paint in the classical way. Now, while I can appreciate an artist experimenting with his techniques and attempting to create his own unique style (Van Gogh being the prime example of a highly recognizable style), I don’t like seeing someone with God-given talent tossing it aside. Feel free to tell me why I’m wrong in saying that, but you won’t change my mind. Not on this topic.

“Vase with Red Gladioli” (1886), “Fritillaries in a Copper Vase” (1887), and “Vase with Red Poppies” (1886)

But there is something about Van Gogh’s work that sets him apart from these others I’ve mentioned. Perhaps it’s that I can see real talent in some of his pieces. I do enjoy what is arguably his most famous painting, “The Starry Night”, as well as a few others, including this self-portrait from the spring of 1887. Though if you’ve ever seen photographs of Vincent and Theo, you might wonder if all these “self-portraits” are of Vincent himself or are actually portraits of his brother!

“Self-Portrait” (1887)

When you look at many of Van Gogh’s paintings, it’s obvious that he was searching for peace and serenity. He appreciated beauty and strove to capture it as best he could. A great example of this for me is his series of cypress paintings. My favourite being “Wheat Field with Cypresses”. It’s very calm and peaceful, while still suggesting movement in those billowy clouds and tall grass.

“Wheat Field with Cypresses” (1889)

I guess I’ve always felt some sympathy for Van Gogh. I see so many so-called “artists” living the dream — respected by other artists and the public, seeing their paintings hanging in galleries in their own lifetime, garnering unearned compliments for work that is pure garbage. But there was this man who wanted so badly to paint. To see beauty and paint beauty and just settle his mind. In the end, his demons got the better of him, but not before he turned out close to 900 paintings.

I dream of painting and then I paint my dream.

If you haven’t seen the Doctor Who episode “Vincent and the Doctor” (S5E10), look that up today and watch it. I know, it’s just a silly sci-fi show. But this episode was a wonderfully moving tribute to the artist, with an ending that will bring tears to those of us with even the most cold, hardened hearts.

I suppose I wrote this blog post today because this man perplexes me. The paintings I’ve highlighted here are really the only ones I like, but I DO like them and I can’t explain why. So for that reason I’d like to nod him a very sincere happy birthday wish. I hope you found some peace in death, Vincent, and that like the Vincent in Doctor Who, you’ve now had the privilege of seeing that your work has touched the hearts of so many. For some inexplicable reason, mine included.

Pietà” — inspired by a painting of French artist Eugène Delacroix (1889)

 I am still far from being what I want to be, but with God’s help I shall succeed.

~ Vincent Van Gogh

I’ve always said that I was born too late. Usually I just mean that I’d be happiest as a 1950’s housewife. A real June Cleaver-type, you know? Vacuuming in heels? Heck, yeah, I’m there! But it’s even more accurate to say what my dad has told me.

“You were born in the wrong century.”

*sighs* Yep, he’s right. The 21st century just isn’t doing it for me. Now, the late 15th, early 16th century? When the art world was flourishing with incredible religious paintings and sculptures? YES. That’s where someone like me belongs.

The Italian Renaissance was a time when everything old was made new again, and creativity was abundant. The Renaissance effectively ended what is known as the Byzantine era. It pushed away the stiff, flat forms that had dominated art during the Middle Ages, replacing them with much more classical, realistic depictions of the human body, harkening back to the art of ancient Greece.

Now, I love Byzantine art. I mean for crying out loud, my Twitter bio says, I’m a “Commission artist specializing in Byzantine styled Bible symbolism.” But there is nothing more beautiful to me than the religious works that emerged from the hundred year period of about 1450 to 1550.

Many great artists came out of the Renaissance period. Michelangelo, Sandro Botticelli, Titian, Fra Filippo Lippi, Carlo Crivelli, Raphael. But the greatest of these was arguably Leonardo Da Vinci.

Francesco Melzi’s Portrait of Leonardo Da Vinci

Born April 15, 1452, 563 years later, Da Vinci is considered one of the greatest artists of all time. He is the quintessential “Renaissance Man”. The artist was known primarily as a painter, but he was so much more than that.

Da Vinci’s thirst for knowledge was second to none. He painted, he sculpted, he was a mathematical genius and a military engineer. He studied botany, anatomy, and astronomy. In addition to being an accomplished artist, he was also an architect, intellect and a scientist, and perhaps one of the most brilliant inventors the world has ever known. He studied absolutely everything and I believe it was his vast knowledge that allowed him to create such breathtaking works of art.

In truth great love springs from the full knowledge of the thing that one loves; and if you do not know it, you can love it but little or not at all.

He didn’t just paint a picture. He created the forms and figures knowing exactly what went into their natural being. At a time when ordering an anatomy textbook from Amazon didn’t exist, Da Vinci, like other artists prior to the 20th century, took things apart to see how they worked. Some of his most impressive works are his anatomical drawings. What better way to learn how the human body went together than to cut one apart!

The painter who has a knowledge of the sinews, muscles and tendons will know very well in the movement of a limb, how many and which of the sinews are the cause of it, and which muscle by the swelling is the cause of the contraction of that sinew.

Unlike some other great artists, Leonardo’s list of paintings is a fairly short one. There aren’t hundreds of Da Vinci’s to be admired like there are Van Goghs. The number is actually more like only 30. You may also be surprised to learn that Leonardo Da Vinci’s most famous work is actually one of my least favourite paintings.

The Mona Lisa is thought to be a portrait of Lisa Gherardini, wife of Francesco del Giocondo, a Florentine cloth merchant. The Louvre in Paris is the painting’s home and they date the piece to between 1503 and 1506. I’d venture to say that a thousand stories have been birthed by that one mysterious smile. This unknown lady has become one of the most famous women in the world.

What is fair in men passes away, but not so in art.

The painting has been beautifully executed. From Lisa’s delicately veiled head down to those soft, luminous hands at rest. She is a wonderful example of Leonardo’s mastery of sfumato –a painting technique characterized by imperceptible transitions between colours and tones. Sfumato literally means “to evaporate like smoke”. Da Vinci’s gradations of shading are soft and subtle. There are no lines or borders. Light blends into dark, and no hard transitions are visible.

But the technical perfection is, to me, flawed by one simple fact: Mona Lisa is not an overly attractive woman. For me, she lacks the beauty of, say, the angel or even Mary in “The Virgin of the Rocks.”

Study for the angel in “The Virgin of the Rocks”

Now, originally I started a little write-up talking about the two versions of “The Virgin of the Rocks”, but there’s such a great little mystery there that I’ve decided to save that discussion for its own blog post. Stay tuned!

Another of Leonardo’s lovely ladies is the girl in “La Belle Ferronniere”, or “Portrait of a Woman of the Court of Milan”.

There is also the Virgin in a cartoon by Leonardo housed in the National Gallery of London — “The Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Young St. John the Baptist”.

Alone, she’s a figure of striking beauty, but with its extreme shadows and highlights, the work as a whole is a tad unnerving to look at. Especially the eerie figure of St. Anne…

A similar work made the news a few years back when the question of “To restore, or not to restore” started a very heated debate. Now, yes, I have some pretty strong opinions myself when it comes to restoring/conserving artwork, but that too is a topic for another day.

The painting in question was Da Vinci’s “The Virgin and Child with St. Anne”.

As you can see, the surface of the painting had become quite splotchy, and some of the back boards had cracked, leaving a nasty visible “break” down the center of the figures. Many were concerned that restorers were over-cleaning the work, and that instead of enhancing the work’s original colours and bringing to light small subtleties lost thanks to the multiple coats of browning varnish, that the painting would turn into something completely different than what Leonardo had intended. I watched a fascinating documentary about the painting’s restoration — “Leonardo da Vinci: The Restoration of the Century“. Here’s what it looks like now.

The most striking difference is the brightness of the blue on Mary’s clothes. The restorer filled the crack and did all the touch up in acrylics. I actually watched the documentary twice, because let me tell you, this is somewhat of a dream job for me. If I lived elsewhere, you would probably find me in the back room of an art museum, conserving the art I hold so dear.

As with any old painting, it’s difficult to know for sure what was “okay” to remove and what perceived “flaws” might actually have been intended by the artist. The restored painting looks very nice, but the topic of whether this went too far is still very much alive. One of the cool things the cleaning uncovered though? A fingerprint in blue paint obscured by the dirty varnish hidden in the leaves of the tree. Obviously the remnant of some finger-blending. Is it Da Vinci’s? It certainly seems likely, and I think that’s pretty cool.

…whatever exists in the universe, in essence, in appearance, in the imagination, the painter has first in his mind and then in his hand.

It’s difficult sometimes for those of us who were born in the latter part of the 20th century to imagine a time when airplanes didn’t exist. We live in a world with some pretty amazing technology, but because we’ve never had to live without it, the sheer magnitude of the inventive genius behind it can be lost on us. A few hundred years before the Wright Brothers made history at Kitty Hawk, our Renaissance Man was already imagining what it would be like for man to leave the ground.

Da Vinci did extensive research on birds and studied the dynamics of what made them fly. He designed a helicopter, parachute, and a pair of enormous wings whose design resembles today’s hang gliders. His flying machine designs show that Leonardo was undoubtedly ahead of his time. In his notebooks can also be found sketches of war machines — things like tanks, a scythed chariot and a one-manned battleship. His giant crossbow and machine gun are very impressive, as are his designs for mortars that fire explosive shells. This is the kind of artillery that wouldn’t actually be produced until the 19th century. Oh, and did I mention he was designing an automobile too?

I wish to work miracles; it may be that I shall possess less than other men of more peaceful lives, or than those who want to grow rich in a day. I may live for a long time in great poverty, as always happens, and to all eternity will happen, to alchemists, the would-be creators of gold and silver, and to engineers who would have dead water stir itself into life and perpetual motion, and to those supreme fools, the necromancer and the enchanter.

Caravaggio is my favourite artist, but Leonardo Da Vinci is a close second. My favourite painting would have to be his “Saint John the Baptist’, painted about 1507.

I absolutely adore this painting. I loved it so much that I even painted my own version of it some years ago.

“St. John the Baptist” is quite possibly the last of Leonardo’s paintings done entirely by his hand. (Like many of the great masters, Da Vinci worked with assistants later in his life.) It’s so beautifully painted that it takes my breath away whenever I see it.

I’m not a quarrelsome person, but there is something about this piece that I would like to say. It’s likely to offend, but seriously, that’s just too bad. It’s said that Saint John’s design is a reworking of an angel in a previous (and now lost) painting by Da Vinci. Allow me to quote from a book I have. As a great lover of both art and Biblical symbolism, and Da Vinci himself, I take great exception to this posturing:

“The conversion of The Angel into the almost perversely sensuous St. John bears erotic, possibly homosexual implications. For though St. John points piously upward toward the Prime Mover with his right hand, his salacious, inviting gaze and his nudity, barely concealed by a seductive leopard skin, allude instead to carnal desire. This St. John is a sort of fallen angel, who engages the spectator in a clearly obscene through.”

Mhmm. It continues in the same perverted vein, but this is enough for what I have to say. Just one simple thing, really: Get your f*cking minds out of the gutter. I can not even fathom the depths of filth that people will sink to in order to satisfy some disgustingly twisted lust in their wicked and rotten little black hearts.

And this isn’t just some fringe of society who try to read this kind of perversion into artwork. It’s the “experts” and “scholars” who promote this thinking. I will not even bother going into the symbolism *I* see in this piece (and yes, I DO think John is depicted in a more feminine manner on purpose), but suffice it to say, I do NOT find this painting represents ANYTHING the above quote suggests. I have had my fill of people who see phallic symbols in everything. Not EVERYthing is about sex. Got it? Yes? Good.

Painting is the way to learn to know the maker of all marvellous things.

There are two other works that I simply must mention here. The first is one I have already written a bit about in a previous post, “Depictions of Christ in Art“. It’s Da Vinci’s recently discovered “Salvator Mundi”.

What a glorious painting! In 2011, “Salvator Mundi” became the first Da Vinci work to be accepted by scholars in more than a century. The modelling of the paint is superb and our Lord has been depicted with a mesmerizing, haunted gaze. A little different than the Jesus in the second of Da Vinci’s most famous paintings, “The Last Supper”.

I love this painting as well. It’s full of symbolism. You know, there aren’t many people throughout history that I’d really like to meet, but Leonardo Da Vinci is one of the few I would. He doesn’t receive nearly enough credit for the things he understood and the incredibly clever way he worked symbolism into his art. That ownerless knife-wielding hand…? And no, it’s not Peter’s. (And for crying out loud, it IS John, not Mary Magdalene next to Jesus. I smell another blog post that discusses the symbolism in “The Last Supper”…)

There just are no words to describe Leonardo. Not adequately. The man, the artist, the master. He was always eager to learn. To practice, to experiment. He wanted to understand how things worked, and why they worked. His life was spent creating and he has left us with much food for thought if we care to look for it. There’s much more to his paintings than meets the eye and his genius is evident in his abundance of sketches and designs. Da Vinci was a man centuries ahead of his time. An artist, a thinker, a true Renaissance man, whose unique talents will continue to live on through his art for centuries to come.

As long as these my limbs endure, I shall possess a perpetual sorrow, and with good reason… It is a hurt to anyone to lose such a man, for nature cannot again produce his like.

Note: All quotes are attributed to Da Vinci.

Wanderlust: a strong desire to travel

Wanderlust is a word I had never heard before I discovered Pinterest. But today, you can find it everywhere. Everybody wants to travel. Well… not everybody.

“Wanderlust” is a term that does not apply to me. I’ve never had the travel bug. Both my parents loved to travel — though they never ventured farther than the United States. But like me, my grandma doesn’t enjoy travelling either. She says I must have inherited my desire to stay put from her. Since our birthdays are only a day apart, I can believe that.

Having said this, I will admit that there ARE a few countries I’d like to visit before I die. Italy for the art, Egypt for the ancient culture, and France, England and Russia to do some genealogy/family research. But anything beyond that? Nah. I’m not really interested.

There are also a few smaller scale places I’d like to go though. Not surprising, I love museums and art galleries. And thanks to the internet, today, you don’t always HAVE to travel to see what treasures places like The Metropolitan Museum of Art have hidden inside.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

If you’re not keen on a trip to overcrowded New York, I have great news. You can browse much of the MET’s extensive collection online for free on “The MET: The Collection Online“. Currently, there are over 400,000 records to search through. Search by artist, time period, geographic location, or type of artwork. There are paintings and sculptures for every taste and preference.

Now yes, I’ll admit that there’s really no substitute for seeing “the real thing”, up close and in person, but this is an incredible resource and truly the next best thing. We’re not talking about low resolution thumbnails here. Many of the works catalogued are of the highest quality. And the best part is, you can also see a lot of the works that aren’t on display at the museum. Something you couldn’t do if you just walked through the front doors.

Lucas Cranach the Elder, “Christ before Herod”, Woodblock (Not on view)

As you can well imagine, there are hundreds of millions of artifacts and artwork gathered in museums and galleries worldwide. But every building can only display so many things at a time. There are wonderful treasures hidden in every single one of them, locked away from admiring eyes, and collecting dust in some stuffy old vault or storehouse.

Well, I for one, would like to see some of them. And thanks to the dedicated stewards of antiquity and art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I can. And you can too.

So how about you work in a little art appreciation today by paying the MET’s “The Online Collection” a visit. And while taking in all the beauty and opulence that history has to offer, you can also marvel at the fact that you travelled to New York, Paris, and Italy… without ever having to leave your couch.

I’m so picky when it comes to art. Just like I’m picky when it comes to horror. NO, I didn’t say I had a refined palate when it comes to horror! Just that I’m picky about what I like. It’s not my fault that what I like is often campy, kooky, and well… crappy.

So what could be better for me than mixing art and horror?

It’s rare that I see a current artist whose work is so incredible that I want to talk about it. That’s not saying there aren’t a lot of great artists out there painting today. There absolutely are. Tons of them. But as I just said, I’m pretty picky when it comes to art that I like. Recognizing good art and eagerly tipping your hat to the talents of an artist isn’t the same as liking what the artist creates.

In keeping with the October Halloween spirit here on Seeker of Truth, I want to introduce you to one of my favourite current artists. He paints a variety of subjects, but it’s his horror-themed masterpieces that leave me practically speechless.

The artist is Jason Edmiston. I admit that I enjoy having my own distinctive style of painting, but Edmiston is one of the few artists in the world whose work makes me say, “Geez, I wish I could paint like that!”

You can learn more about him here, but for today, I just want to show you some of his amazing horror paintings. They’re insanely colourful and superbly executed. His style is incredibly unique and immediately recognizable. Rendered in the most exquisite detail, Edmiston’s paintings somehow blend high realism with caricature, and the result is portraits simply glowing with life and full of character. He has the flair of Basil Gogos, with a much more refined execution. I love it.

And like Gogos, he’s done some cover art for “Famous Monsters of Filmland”. Which as far as I’m concerned, is way more prestigious than having your art hanging in any fancy gallery in the world.

Jason Edmiston “Famous Monsters of Filmland” #254, #261 Covers

My favourite of Edmiston’s pieces is “The Bride”. This is also one of my favourite paintings of all time. She’s amazing. Also very fitting considering I’ll be featuring my own brand spanking new Bride of Frankenstein painting in Saturday’s Halloween post, celebrating Bride of Frankenstein‘s 80th anniversary.

Jason Edmiston, “The Bride”

And be sure to visit JasonEdmiston.com to see some of his other fantastic pop culture creations.

Until next time, unpleasant dreams . . .

^..^

While you may not know his name, you’re probably all familiar with the bearded TV artist known for his gentle, soft-spoken manner, and iconic afro hairstyle. His show, “The Joy of Painting”, aired on PBS from 1983 till 1994, a year before the artist’s untimely death at the age of 52.

Even non-artists enjoy watching Bob paint. There’s just something mesmerizing about his quiet and peaceful approach to painting. And while his paintings are actually quite crude in execution, they’re absolutely beautiful, and it’s a true joy to watch them take shape as Bob patiently explains each step with a smile and a few words of encouragement.

We don’t make mistakes. We have happy accidents.

I have loved watching Bob Ross since I was too young to even pick up a paintbrush. My mom and dad used to hold dinner until practically-still-in-diapers-Wendy had finished seeing what gorgeous landscape Bob was creating that day. I was too young to remember any of it, but years ago, when I rediscovered “The Joy of Painting” on TV, it was honestly like seeing a very old friend again. He was so familiar to me that I knew we had met before.

They say that in a child’s life, the first six years are the most formative. During this time (more so than any other), children soak up information and are inspired by what they’re exposed to. There’s no question that Bob Ross influenced me a great deal. I mean, painting is my career! Hard to get any more inspired than that.

Bob even kept pet squirrels and loved birds… did my affinity for befriending squirrels and birds come partly from watching him growing up? Hard to say for sure, but I doubt it was a coincidence.

Spending 30 minutes watching Bob in the studio is better than 3 hours of traditional therapy. Bob always came across as so kind and very talented. Sometimes when I can’t sleep, I’ll put on an episode of Bob, and it’s so soothing, that despite wanting to stay awake to see the finished painting, I fall asleep anyway.

From ocean views (my favourite to watch) to mountain scenes, snowy fields, luminous waterfalls to lush, green forests, Bob’s serene landscapes are unmistakeable. And his wet-on-wet technique is a style that’s still taught by certified Bob Ross instructors to this day.

As Bob wanted to share the joy of painting, so I want to share the joy of watching Bob. Right now, you can watch — for free — “The Joy of Painting” marathon streaming online on Twitch. October 29th would have been Bob’s 73rd birthday, and to honour him (as well as to celebrate the official launch of Twitch Creative), the online channel is airing all 403 episodes of the original series. That’s eight and a half days straight of Bob painting… I won’t tell you how many hours I’ve watched since it began Thursday night. But I’m watching it right now as I write this post… and it’s been on since I got up at 8:00 this morning…..

So if you have some spare time over the next few days, I encourage you to check out an episode or two. And on behalf of one of my favourite artists and myself, I’d like to wish you all happy painting, and God bless, my friends.

And God bless you, Bob. Thanks for being you and for making our lives just that little bit better.