My approach to the illustration is based on the keyword and the literal understanding of the article, hence producing work from an unbiased perspective with a humous or sarcastic take. In my illustration I depicted the ‘man’ under ‘ipad baking’ as a twist to ‘sun baking’ to be slightly ironic, with the use of a cool tone lighting I aimed to portray a therapeutic experience based on the author’s approach to technology. However, the use of blue lighting and a claustrophobic space alludes to the toxicity of ‘digital addiction’ based on the article, revealing the negative side. The reference of ‘Facebook’ and the baby peaking through is not only to be direct in visual languages but also to make a clear linkage to the article. Furthermore, the contrast in size between the screen and the man emphasises how weak humans are in relation to technology as mentioned by the author. Overall, I consider my approach to be a metaphorical narrative scene in response to the article.

I think I approach this illustration very differently from how I normally approach my work, both idea and style-wise. Due to my stereotype of editorial illustration and how it is widely represented in the industry, I had a presumption of editorial illustrations in a certain minimalistic commercial style. Therefore, I did not consider accommodating my personal style since I don't think my style fits into the ‘commercial illustration’ category, because it is more decorative and abstract. Instead, I took an approach that the style of art is as direct as possible. In terms of developing the illustration, I focused on the idea of being ‘unbiased’ and that the illustration is meant to assist the editorial and guide the audience visually. Where I would normally approach a piece of work from my subjective understanding and perception, or representing a group that I am a part of. In this case, I have to try to be as objective as possible and consider the aspect of how to recreate the article visually in a straightforward principle.

As I mentioned in the previous question, the main sacrifice I made was mainly in style. I came to a better realisation of it when I asked all my coursemates to guess which one was my work during crit and no one could point it out when my works are usually very recognisable. This also made me notice how I adapted my style to the extent that it has completely fallen into the unified style of ‘commercial illustration’ in the industry. (From a critical perspective, it's not necessarily a negative thing since it is normal to fit the needs of the market. But also it raises the question of: Is it our illustrator’s responsibility to create a diverse environment in the editorial illustration market? Personally, to what extent am I willing to sacrifice my own identity in my work in a realistic context?) Seeing a lot of my coursemates can still maintain their usual style or personal identity in their editorial illustration also made me reflect on whether my approach to this project is the only way.

Differing from most of my course mate I talked to, whose major challenges revolves around representing culture, belief, identity, and minorities, I find maintaining my individuality most challenging and my relation to editorial illustration in general. Yet, this struggle might vary with an editorial that suits my personal interest or style more. However, I do want to look into how I can merge my style visually or technically into editorial illustrations.

‘In conversation’: theatre of the oppressed

‘Positionally’

‘Form’-Why editorial illustrations look so similar these days, Anne Quito

‘Contextualised Practice’

‘Value’

‘How to visit certain topics’→ sensitive topics→ when entering topics that are not ours

‘conversation with the text’

‌

‌

- How did you approach to this illustration and how does it differ from your usual works?

- What sacrifice did you make to fit the article, the platform and the audience more?

- connotation and self-reflection based on the sacrifices?

- limited to ‘norms’, and why have they been viewed as norms for me

- What’s your definition of illustration and how does it differ from editorial illustration?

- How does your approach differ from the author?

- What’s your positionally on the article, the subject and the audience, and how will that affect your work?

- To what extent can your positionality be fully represented while not defeating the purpose of the article?

- How does your illustration fill the gaps in the article?

Illustration took inspiration from:

How did you approach?

-Night time, safe environment (home), reflects the theme of the article being self care, dating, night life in the city

-Use of positive and negative space to build form and contrast

Critical: why its not a good thing→ should be actively (consciously ) thinking what elements to put in your illustrations instead of putting biased or stereotypes in it, every small decisions can leads into a harmful depiction of things

example: knife crime→racist and classist without researching on the group of people who are actually being affected

Editorial illustration:

Introduce your work

-How did you approach the article

-Do you think its appropriate to be biased for an editorial illustration?

came to realisation —- Just as gilian Rose said ‘Visual imagery is never innocent; it is always constructed through various practices, technologies and knowledges’

As an illustrator how to avoid messages being misinterpreted by the audience?

Conclusion

-more responsibility on the artist to do research

*Intentions and how the message get pass to the audience

We did find it hard to answer the questions and be constantly responsive to each other under the time limit. However, after couple trials we managed to keep the conversation as raw and as natural is possible while still managing to go though all the points. There’s definitely more aspect of each questions we could talk about. 

I’m fascinated by the fact that even tho my partner and my approach to the illustration or the podcast are every different, we still manage to link back to each other’s points by finding connections and key words. 

Due to unexpected situations I ended up doing another podcast with another partner. It is interesting how both of them took a similar approach in the conversation, potentially because of a similar positionality, allowing our conversation to be revolve around the responsibility of editorial illustration, illustrator.