Zak’s Comments (group member since Apr 18, 2009)

Zak’s comments from the Q&A with Zak Smith group.

David Thomson's entry on Ronald Reagan is pretty dead on. From his "biographical dictionary of film". Sartre's essay on St. George, likewise.


Oh, also, Borges, in his "Prologues To A Personal Library"

In the portrait of Xi'an--those are her comics. And yes, it is a weird coincedence that there is a vietnamese girl named Xi'an in some of those comics--well, she liked them maybe because of that. anyway, they are early issues from the 80s--don;t know exactly which ones--check around the Demon Bear Saga.

I never read Ruskin or Beckett on art.

As for Hickey: well, he's still alive and writing about art for a living, so there's no way you can trust anything I say about him in a public forum.

The theory people I like best are John Paul Sartre and David Thomson--who writes about film. He doesn't pay much attention to the visuals, but his writing about actors is priceless.

No and no.

I feel like Cecily's paintings--of movement and action--are helped by the fact that her brushwork also obviously incorporates a lot of movement and action. My portraits are often obviously the work of someone sitting still trying very hard to get something p...re..cise...ly right, and so it can be hard to make action convincing in certain ways--so I gravitate toward a more static image in the larger paintings. You slowly look, the subject slowly looks at you.

I don't have a ready answer--I had to actually go look at my own website and go "How is this guy's use of color unlike anyone else's?" Since I usually just refine as I go along and end up with whatever I end up with.

After looking at my site just now I think I'll say this: I feel like I use color a lot more like a graphic designer than most painters do. Even hard-edge geometric painters and their recent gaggle of imitators tend to use flat color in a less grpaphic-designy way than me.

Usually.

At least that's what I think this morning.

Well everyone always carries a camera now--in their phone. Before digital photography I had a minox B 8mm spy camera and thought I was real clever.

I only draw from my own pics or life--the exception was some stuff in Gravity's Rainbow where i obviously needed some photo reference since i wasn't around for wwII. If the book said Franklin Roosevelt I had to go find a picture of Franklin Roosevelt.

How do I decide where I want color? The same way I decide I want anything else I suppose--I look at the picture and see what it needs.

Have I ever changed my mind about that? Yes, all the time.

As for the last question, I don't think that's for me to say--it's too fresh in my mind. I won't really be able to judge my own book until I've sort of left it alone and forgot about it for awhile.

I will say that I don't really think there's ever been a first-person autobiographical thing from anyone in the adult industry that tried to be "literary non-fiction" and the non-fiction-about-something-with-drawings-by-the-same-author format is not something you see every day--outside of like 19th century naturalist monographs on butterflies or crappy indie emo comic books.

Sculptures of women? No, never did.

I recently got some sculpey and experimented with making tiny tiny heads--heads sculpted with sewing needles. So far, nothing, but maybe when I'm done with the painting I'm working on I'll have time to stretch out with it.

Are the people having sex ideas for future paintings? No. At least they weren't intended that way--they're just what happened to be happening at the time.

I feel like painting action in my ornate style creates a complicated set of problems. I've made a few steps in that direction though--like the triptych in my last show--two girls getting ready to shoot a movie.

Oh, also, for clarity's sake--since none of this is about the avengers, I re-posted this stuff in new threads.

For clarity's sake--since none of this is about the Avengers, I re-posted this stuff in a new thread.

Jason wants to know:


Are there any comic book writers/illustrators who you talk with? Do you make drawings of what your reading as you read a book, or do you wait until after finishing the book? Do you have drawings for In Viriconium? Is there an artist who you admired for their illustrations of literature (for example Delacroix's illustrations of Faust)?




Do you ever make sculptures of the women you've drawn? Some of the scketches on your website are people having sex. Are those ideas for future paintings?


Sculptures of women? No, never did.

I recently got some sculpey and experimented with making tiny tiny heads--heads sculpted with sewing needles. So far, nothing, but maybe when I'm done with the painting I'm working on I'll have time to stretch out with it.

Are the people having sex ideas for future paintings? No. At least they weren't intended that way--they're just what happened to be happening at the time.

I feel like painting action in my ornate style creates a complicated set of problems. I've made a few steps in that direction though--like the triptych in my last show--two girls getting ready to shoot a movie.


I know a few of those guys, but most of the people I know well are indie comics people--like Jeff Lewis and the guys in Partyka. ( www.partykausa.com )

With GR and Blood Meridian, I read first and drew after.

I never drew "In Viriconium"--Ian Miler adapted some of Harrison's stuff and he is pretty tough to compete with.

Harry Clarke is probably the best classic literary illustrator for my money--he needs to be way more well known than he is. Runners up: Ralph Steadman, John Tenniel and Aubrey Beardsley.

100 girls and 100 Octopuses took like 250 days-ish. About a painting every 2 days or so, plus lots of room for ones that didn't work out. "All Dead Facts and Static" and the portraits (all about 30 X 40 inches) take about a month each.

I read an essay by Palahniuk once. It was good. Never read anything else. Probably will when I'm done reading all the other books lying around here.

I know a few of those guys, but most of the people I know well are indie comics people--like Jeff Lewis and the guys in Partyka. ( www.partykausa.com )

With GR and Blood Meridian, I read first and drew after.

I never drew "In Viriconium"--Ian Miler adapted some of Harrison's stuff and he is pretty tough to compete with.

Harry Clarke is probably the best classic literary illustrator for my money--he needs to be way more well known than he is. Runners up: Ralph Steadman, John Tenniel and Aubrey Beardsley.

Incidentally, I feel like that's part of my problem with what I did on Gravity's Rainbow--too many talking heads.

I liked Leinil Francis Yu's art, especially the early New Avengers stuff--really gorgeously dynamic and not really like anybody else. He was either inking it himself or it was computer inked or something. Lately they've got other artists or they've got other people inking Yu and it looks a little stiff so I haven't paid much attention to the story since then.

As for the writing: I like Bendis when he gives the artists something to draw-like giant aliens or ninjas or whatever, and his dialogue is very good, but I really don't like the issues which are just endless talking heads. If I want to look at talking heads I'll watch "Law and Order". And I don't.