From Voice ~ Topics: illustration, theory

Ode to Illustration

The question whether or not illustration is a valuable communications tool should be evident to everyone. Of course it is; at least when it accomplishes what illustration does best. What might that be, you ask? Let me count the ways:

1. When it adds an additional dimension to a text. Illustration can conceptually synthesize the essence of a story in such an acute way that the ideas therein are illuminated beyond the facility of words. The best illustrations supplement rather than merely compliment (or mimic) the text.

2. When it draws the reader into a story through a fusion of form and content. An illustration must be engaging at first glance, or require a double take, which is often a function of style and composition. A work that fails to pique the eye has little hope of triggering the mind. But surface is not an end in itself. An illustration must deliver the conceptual punch through pun, metaphor, allegory, or symbol.

3. When it invites the reader to decipher a message. Given the traits mentioned above, an illustration is a puzzle or brain teaser waiting to be interpreted. To efficiently stimulate the reader it must include blank spaces; it cannot tell a literal story but rather provide something of a riddle that must be solved, and that takes time.

4. When it serves as an icon. A single image is a concise amalgam of various notions fused into a visual idea. Rather than an easily forgotten decorative trope, a successful illustration leaves a mental “cookie” or mnemonic that enables recall of a story through conjuring an image that starkly summarizes content. The best illustrations are memorable signposts.

5. When it stands on its own as well as in close proximity to a text. Keeping an integral distance from the text without tearing the connective tissue is the most difficult task for any illustrator. An illustration must function as artwork as well as visual modifier. This does not mean inherent timelessness, but it does suggest that an illustration is understandable with or without its accompanying headline and story. It is not always possible to achieve the ideal illustration. Often committees intervene and good ideas are compromised as a result. Sometimes truly strong concepts are neutered because they are too demonstrative for the editorial context. Other times the illustrator simply fails to achieve the right conceptual balance between original thinking and universal language, and clichés result. Moreover, there are many times when a good illustrator is paired with the wrong story. But when everything is in alignment—when the illustrator acutely understands the subject—then magic happens with the result being phenomenally profound, incredibly witty, and decidedly memorable illustration.

As an art director I have given many illustrators difficult themes that I personally find impossible to visually interpret. I rely on the illustrator to conceive ideas and am beholden to their sleight of hand, which is an imprecise way of saying the neurological hardwiring that enable these conceptualists to discover ideas that are inaccessible to other mortals. By way of example, below are two such images that I used as cover illustrations for The New York Times Book Review.

The first by Mirko Ilic (fig 1) represents the dangers involved in temporarily abrogating certain civil liberties by legalizing such intrusions as surveillance. Rendering the American symbol for justice in such a realistic, Oscar-like manner invested power into the image (a pen sketch would not have been as startling). By adding the cameras to Justice’s head Ilic transformed the symbol into a memorable icon that telegraphs danger more effectively than most words.

The second by Christoph Niemann (fig 2) illustrates the overarching concept of violence without resorting to horrific clichés. The power of the black and red (an unforgiving color combination) being carved into the paper by fierce saw blades sums up the violent nature of mankind. And yet the image has beauty. Like Ilic’s illustration, the reader is invited to contemplate rather than be repulsed by the image, allowing for an even more profound understanding of the theme.

When illustration is spot on, there are few better means of communicating ideas and interactively engaging with an audience.

About the Author: Steven Heller is Art Director of The New York Times Book Review and co-chair of the MFA/Design Program of the School of Visual Arts. He has written and co-authored over 80 books on graphic design and popular art. In 1999 he received the AIGA Medal.

  1. link to this comment by Illustration Grad student Sat Mar 20, 2004

    Thanks for the Ode. It gives me something to strive for. But is it possible to achieve only one or two of the five points and still be a good illustrator? I simply have to wonder how many illustrations produced in the course of a month or year live up to this goal? Before attending grad school I may have had one "perfect" illustration. The rest were mediocre concepts, derivative styles, and earnest but second rate attempts to do something good. And still they were published. Go figure. But what does that say about the "art of illustration?"

  2. link to this comment by Roger R Mon Mar 29, 2004

    The problem with much illustration is the illusion that it says something when actually it says nothing. The drawings by Ilic and Neimann are graphically striking, but what do I really learn from these pictures? Justice was blind but now can see? Saw blades represent violence, but they also help build things? The problem seems to be ambiguity reigns in illustration of this conceptual genre. They can be read in different ways by different people, or by the same people. Ulitmately it takes words (headlines, captions, etc.) to contextualize an image. Is this bad? Don't know. But I think that ambiguity doesn't really take a stand, and most illustration is used for effect and affect not for true meaning.

  3. link to this comment by Jacob. B Thu Apr 15, 2004

    RE: Roger R.
    Visual language can not always be interpreted with succinct verbal messages (For example, how would you describe the color red to someone who has never seen it?). Ambiguity frustrates unimaginative people. But even when you spell some things out, the meaning can still be ambiguous (Example, what does the Big Bad Wolf who ate Little Red Riding Hood look like? The "true meaning" of this written description of the wolf is visually interpreted "different ways by different people, or by the same people").

  4. link to this comment by Jim Gillgam Tue Apr 12, 2005

    I think that every illustrator should master one medium better than all the others. I would suggest that young illustrators have one "pet" medium, it can be pencil, pen and ink, paint, digital etc. Choose a medium that you already have a natural ability and interest in, and then minor on the others.

    I've seen people that are so talented in a medium such as pen and ink attempt painting and waste much time trying to develop skill in something that was just not their thing. I've also seen the reverse, where someone has fantastic painting ability, but their pen and ink really lacks any quality.

    Know thyself!

  5. link to this comment by Nate Williams Tue May 17, 2005

    Fantastic article .. I have a always thought of illustration as a way for the reader to get information effortlessly before they invest time in reading the entire article .. I think Steve articulated it quite well.

  6. link to this comment by simon Fri Jun 10, 2005

    Fantastic article.I personally feel that an article like this should be printed every day, just to remind people that you cant be an Illustrator with ease. It is the hardest skill of them all when done properly. Remember you design a Illustration which that takes alot of research(target audience),thoery,TALENTetc. Illustration for me is about bringing the topic and the audience together

  7. link to this comment by Casey Matetich Mon Mar 12, 2007

    I found this article to be extremely helpful and illuminating. I am in an illustration class and the conceptual brainstorming process is unlike any other I have come across in school. I feel like I can arrive at a successful solution faster in other communication design fields than I can with illustration. For example, it is so hard to achieve a work that is not “stock image,” meaning appropriate for a variety of text, like clip art. All the while the artist has to battle society’s ever shortening attention span as well as convey a subtle commentary without losing the reader. This article helped me focus on what was important and serves as a checklist throughout the difficult conceptual process.

  8. link to this comment by Sabrina Diez Fri Mar 23, 2007

    I agree that illustration, when done right, can visualize a concept so clearly for a reader. I think that illustration has so few boundaries and has the ability to be incredibly imaginative. With such dazzling photography available today, I think that sometimes designers forget about the ability illustration has to speak in visual metaphors. Hi quality illustration works so well with design because it speaks to the viewer in a way that they would find photography unbelievable. I personally believe that because of the incredible things that can be done with photography, the days of realistic illustration are all but over, but I think stylized illustration will always have a place in design, achieving something that is hard to in any other form.

Add a Comment

AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.