Julie R. Neidlinger: Lone Prairie Blog

Edible art.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 0 comments link this post

Today turned out to be a hectic day at work, but I was allowed to "play." I spent the day painting on fondant-covered cakes!

Using a variety of materials (all edible, and most sugar-based), I created several fall-themed cakes, a football cake, some floral cakes, and one (which I shall finish tomorrow right away) meant for little girls with a theme of pink buttons and bows.

Really, this is the perfect outlet, and the answer to the ever-pressing question that all non-selling artists face: where do I store all my artwork? A painting on a cake gets eaten, and shall never need storing. I find this a rather perfect solution, since I quickly grow tired of my artwork if it sits around too long.

"Doesn't it make you feel bad to know someone is going to cut into and then eat your painting?"

No. Not at all. Let them eat cake!

Labels: art, work

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Ten shots of a garden tomato.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 0 comments link this post

There were two tomatoes sitting on the kitchen window sill. They were an amazing red, but still firm. I can't stop thinking of ways I'd like to cut them up and cook them...garlic, oregano...mmmm.

Anyway, here are ten shots of the tomato. I often tell students in regards to photography that it is good practice to get out and shoot one subject multiple times, over and over. It's a good way to get the usual shots out of the way and discover an interesting angle not thought of before, as well as a way to learn how to get to know a subject.

Labels: art, food, nature, photos

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

The North Dakota capitol sketches: #1.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

I've heard a fair share of insults about the appearance of the North Dakota state capitol.

Usually, it's from reprobates wearing NASCAR caps that mistakenly think all government buildings must be Neo-Classical architecture or they are, and I quote a relative, "butt ugly."

On the contrary.

I find the state capitol to be an absolutely beautiful example of what I like to call "stripped down" Art Deco. And inside, it is quite lovely as well.

I like an Ionic and Corinthian column as much as the next guy, but I sure get tired of the insults.

So, today, after studying for almost six hours, I headed up to the capitol to do a little sketching. I'm considering doing many sketches of the building over the next weeks/months and seeing how my interpretation of its essentially clean lines and forms change.

As it is, here is the second drawing I did of the capitol today. The first can be seen here.

I also did a sketch of the mastodon skeleton inside the Heritage Center at the capitol, which you can see here.

You can buy all original three sketches for $12 (plus S&H). Really. That's a pretty good deal.

Materials: Watercolor and/or ink on heavy rag paper
Size: 8.5 X 11
Other: Shipped without frame or mat
Price: $12

Labels: art, capitol sketches, north dakota, summer 2008

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Glack.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

I don't know.

Sometimes I come up with weird stuff.

I found an old day planner book I had evidently decided to defile with...this:

Glack: He'll rip your head off. - Upload a Document to Scribd

Labels: art, cartoons

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Travel journal: The cartoons, the commentary, and the clippings.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 3 comments link this post

::This is the travel journal from my recent trip to Fargo (run the 5K and see a Rodin exhibit)/South Dakota (sister's house)/Tennessee (DI global finals)/and back again. You can read the posts from the trip starting here.::

Tennessee 2008 Journal - Upload a doc

Labels: art, cartoons, journals, travel

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

A little room.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

My friends recently moved to a new house which is cute and cozy and in no way huge (which is a good thing). As a house-warming gift, I thought I'd give them the gift of a little room (a wooden, hand-built box, painted inside, with an open front).

So, here it is.

A "little room."

It's been lived in. I had Bob try it out with some of his furniture. It looks like he settled right in. After I could see that it was structurally sound, I sent the empty room on its way, with a few usage instructions:

How to use your new storage room:

Hang it on a wall or set it on a shelf.
Put stuff in it, like mementos, or a small photo in a frame.
It's a storage room! Store stuff in it!

If only all home and room add-ons were so easy*.

* And not requiring plumb doors, trim, and wainscoting. ~~Crooked~~ Artsy is my specialty, which is why I restrict myself to paint-on remodeling.

Labels: art, friends

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

These are funny comics.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 0 comments link this post

I can't touch the visual and comical perfection of these comics over at BirdandMoon.com. My friend Naomi sent me the link via Facebook.

(Thank you, Naomi. My sister and I laughed our heads off. You know me perfectly.)

Labels: art, cartoons, friends, links

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

One score and minus five years ago...

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

When I catch myself saying "...back when I was in Prague about 15 years ago" I realize I'm fast becoming an elder.

Regardless, I have a video that will only interest people who like drawing, but I'm pointing out here since I put the video on a blog that I don't update much and probably suffers a bit from some stagnation problems. It's of me sketching from a photograph I took in Prague...15 years ago.

Argh.

Prague was beautiful. I have a little money left from there, money from back when it was still Czechoslovakia. Again...I'm eldering: "...back when it was still Czechoslovakia."

Argh. I can now be dated by the changing political maps.

Anyway, here's the video.

Side note: No, the cat is not dead. He's just very, very calm.

Labels: art, video

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Daily summation.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 0 comments link this post

I found a dead deer today. See it "live."

(Ha ha.)

And in other news, lying is art!* Anyone who has sat through an art critique, however, could have already told you that.

Except we didn't call it "lying."

We called it...um..."critique." Or "artspeak." Or, as in this case, "performance art", i.e. the license to be an idiot and get a grade for it.

I could probably use more quotation marks in this post. What do "you think?"

Regardless, the video of the dead deer is art, even if the deer can no longer perform.

*I almost blogged on that story but I decided not to. Made me want to vomit. Whew! Face-saving! It did, however, make me jot down some ideas on art and beauty. You'll get to suffer through that bit of genius soon, no doubt.

Labels: art, current events, my life

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Two stories, two images.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 5 comments link this post

This is a favorite photo of mine.

It has two stories: the story of the day my dad, my grandpa and the hired man ate their lunch out in the field, and the story of the day I drew it.

It was after the Red River Flood of 1997 and the house was full; my sister and her family, displaced from Grand Forks, were there. My parents. Myself. I'd just graduated from college with an art degree and no idea what to do next. I was sleeping in the living room on the sofa since all the bedrooms were full. There were three households of furniture in one house and I was feeling completely closed in, in every possible way.

I found myself, one afternoon, sitting in a back room of the house, surrounded by unpacked boxes, a tiny counter space to work on. A few art supplies were all I had access to: some watercolors and colored pencils. I had a sheet of paper.

I was miserable. I felt like I had to draw something or I would somehow "lose" whatever meaning the meaningless art degree provided me. I felt like I needed some kind of small success.

Flipping through a box of old photos, I found this one. I didn't know where to start, or if I wanted to. But I did, and in some small gift from God, the image literally fell from the photo onto my paper. The brush and the pencil seemed to work on their own.

It's one of my favorite drawings today, that even though I mark as "sold" never plan on selling it.

It has two stories.

(See the drawing here)

Labels: art, clippings, family

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

If Travis were a mother...

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

Travis, resting in God's love.

...he would have a son named Whistler.

My suggestion, to avoid a similar photo, is to take the advice of the rest of your group and use sun screen to avoid the affects of severe Klingon-inducing forehead sunburn which swells and stretches tightly and debilitates you and forces you to zonk out in a rocking chair in the back room of the pastor's house to catch a few fitful Z's while the person with the video camera has access to you and also has an art history background and sees the humor in the scene which immediately made me think of this painting (Whistler's Mother).

Labels: art, friends, nicaragua, nicaragua 2008

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Devils Lake's own she-wolf.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 2 comments link this post

Sculpture groupings should not be haphazard, or the end up looking as bad as "add-on" architecture.

The classic case would be the "She-wolf of the Capitol", or, I suppose as the proper name, the Capitoline Wolf. Etruscan wolf with...little suckling humans added on later. It's a sculpture that nearly drove me insane while studying art history in college.

What were they thinking? The styles -- none of it -- is coherent! I would think as we discussed the reasons the 15th century babies were later added to a much older sculpture. The margins of my notebook are filled with unreasonable and insane ramblings about the propensity for humans to keep adding on. I also had many grumpy-looking drawings. I was highly dissatisfied.

Yes, in keeping with the theme of "posts on subjects that matter little", I am going to tell you about the sculpture grouping in Devils Lake that seems to have slipped past the point of no return.

It started as a very nice sculpture of five geese flying, in memory of a man who had died. This was eventually located at the corner where Highway 19 and 17 intersect in Devils Lake. Then, a piece of WW2-era captured Japanese artillery was added on a concrete base just off to the side of the geese grouping.

Hmmm. What's the message here? I thought the first time I drove past the burgeoning "sculpture park." I knew the city of New Rockford had some a tank and a Vietnam-era (I think) helicopter situated near the highway, but those were all military in origin and the effect was one of a memorial of a number of different wars.

This was...artillery and geese.

Later, after much fuss in the paper after a private citizen purchased a life-size bronze sculpture of a soldier holding a rifle at rest and stuck it out in the same general area -- The Park Board was upset! Did they now have to put up with caring for any sculpture that a person wanted to stick out there?! -- and so then I started to feel that the very nice geese were out of place.

At some point, unbeknownst to me, three more identical soldier figures were purchased, and set at each corner of the artillery piece. There is also a huge, full-color eagle figure somewhere to the back off all of this, flanked by flags, in frozen near-take-off.

The effect is, in my opinion, weird.

I can't find a better word than weird.

We can't just go around sticking sculpture together! A sculptural grouping must be planned or else it becomes like add-on architecture in which styles and materials don't match and the lack of cohesiveness gives little other message than "We didn't plan this."

It's very much like how people hire a contractor to tack a bay window onto a bungalow house or some other such building -- it does not fit visually! Why not just add Palladian windows or Greek Revival architecture to a pup tent! Same thing!

Consider this blog post my margins for ranting about this particular instance.

To complete the look of the Devils Lake sculpture grouping, all we need now are some Renaissance putti sitting on the shoulders of the soldier statues. Then we can call it a day.

My work here is done.

Labels: art, local, rant

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Christmas shopping.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 6 comments link this post

I know there's this "buy nothing / make your own stuff for Christmas" push out there. Since that would rather make life difficult for me and other artists who make our own stuff in hopes of selling it to you in order to stay alive, I would also add a third option to that list: buy from an artist this Christmas.

Sure, it might be more expensive than WalMart. And no, I'm not busy making homemade LCD flat screen TVs. But I do have some stuff...

So. Where to do this?

Well, all over. There are artists all over the internet. For example...

My friend Sarah is a fabulous artist. I really mean that. Her work blows me away with various forms of envy and jealousy. You can visit her web site or go to her Etsy shop and get some really great stuff. For you dog or greyhound lovers, you've found the perfect gifts.

Etsy, in general, is a good place to buy from. You should make it your first stop when deciding to go shopping online. Everything is made by artisans and hobbyists and you're helping support people in the most direct and true way possible: paying them for things they've made with their own hands.

To me, that's a more reasonable answer to the "buy nothing" concept since, if everyone bought nothing, it would sort of mean disaster on great levels. The idea is to kill wanton and excessive consumerism, but since things made by artists tend to be more expensive than the cheap "made in China" products, most people don't go and buy 20 of the same item. One will do. And buyers tend to treasure that one item more than something mass-produced and common, which is easily seen as disposable and replaceable. I buy from artists. I have purchased off of Etsy or in my local craft store. I still have those items.

And of course, uh, you can shop here at Lone Prairie. I don't have too much pride to mention that.

UPDATE: Find out about making your own stuff for Christmas.

(If you know of a great artist, leave a link in the comments section. Spread the love.)

Labels: art, christmas, product placement, promotion

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Art for all. Free for all?

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 2 comments link this post

I used to complain that no one bought my art work, and that if I sold it, it was never to anyone from my immediate area. I no longer fret about the non-sale in the same way, since I assume that if someone wants it they'll buy it, and that there's no reason anyone should or should not want to buy it. And, of course, if I do sell it, it's never to anyone in my immediate area. That hasn't changed.

It took a few years past college to understand that people weren't obligated to buy my work or support me if they didn't want to. Now, at this point, few things irritate me more than a pity buy, which is when I think people are buying stuff from me because they want to help me out and not because they want to buy what they're buying. My general take is as follows: "Do you want the painting? Then buy it. No? Then don't."

In a shortened way of saying so, rather than continue on with paragraphs on the personal and financial complexities of trying to make money while still being creative and honest, I'll sum it up and say: being an artist can be a challenge.

How nice, then, that government help gets involved. Right?

The patron system of the Renaissance would have been something to behold in its day, although it was necessary that you were a very good artist in order to get a patron. It was necessarily biased towards artists that excelled in their craft. For me, the idea of having a patron like that is both a Utopia as well as a burden. With the convenience of having a ready-made "buyer" of my art, I'd also have to create somewhat according to their tastes or wishes.

The other model would be the Northern Renaissance which, to some degree, made it possible for a broader base of people to have art in their homes. Since there weren't piles of images available as posters, faux canvas paintings, and mass produced framed photos for sale at the local discount store, purchasing an image or book or other item from an artist was the only way to spice up the home. However, this being a demand-based market system, the art that sold was the art that the people wanted, which seems obvious.

Not so today. For either system. For any aspect of either system.

In an age of discount, the price of a mass-produced image from a large store makes it impossible for an original artist to compete for the attention of a public that generally hasn't learned the value of originals and handmade and instead, knows the value of numbers on price tags. That discussion I'll save for another day. Let's talk about today's patron and leveler of the buying field, instead.

The patron of today is the government.

Government grants, programs, and other funding are basically what keeps most art programs and art councils going. There are some private grants sources, but government grants and programs are a larger share. Though I have benefited from such "patronage" by being a teacher and being involved in programs and competitions through local art councils, I've often wondered what it says about us that it takes government involvement to stir up interest and support for the arts.

A friend pointed me to an article which highlighted a county that was providing low-interest loans so that people could buy art. The county is looking at it as an aid to economic development which, in my mind, is still an Americanization of art. It's not about the art. It's about economic development.

"The main beneficiary is the working people of Lucas County, who now have a more affordable opportunity to purchase art."

This quote rings untrue. Art can be expensive, and it can also be cheap. There's no shortage of artists, nor artists selling art cheaply. I have a number of pieces that were/are around the $50 and under mark. If "the working people" wanted art, they would get it. In America, if we want something, we generally get it. If people want to drop a bunch of money on NASCAR merchandise or at a restaurant or on art, they will. I question whether the problem was about affordable opportunity rather than a general disinterest in purchasing art.

This, however, was the reason, along with economic development, used to get a local government involved in art. It made me think about what happens when the government gets involved in anything, and what happens when it gets involved in art, such as the sales and livelihood of a specific artist, or in choosing art in a competition-based setting:

1. It creates a "market" for art that isn't being supported otherwise.
2. The squeaky wheel definitely gets the oil, i.e. a traditional plein air painter probably won't get a grant when up against a minority painter, a shock artist, or an artist doing something very unusual.
3. Since the money is coming from all taxpayers, the same restrictions that get muddled into everything the government is involved in applies, such as in regards to religion, affirmative action, etc.
4. Talent isn't always rewarded, while forceful personality and the gift of B.S. is.

Some of the explanations I've heard for the necessity of government involvement in art have valid points, and I've mentioned the main one earlier: in American culture, we aren't taught to really appreciate the arts, or things handmade and original. It is an anomaly to find people that have this appreciation, it truly is. Having a booth at an art or craft fair and hearing the comments people make while browsing is very educational; I would say that 70 percent of the comments I've heard bear this theory out. We are a kind of bottom-line, no-nonsense society where making the best buy makes it more logical to purchase a print at a discount store than spend four times that much money on an original painting. Why buy a $30 necklace when you can get the same thing at Target for $8? I understand that thinking. I do it myself in some areas, though not in regards to art.

It's that thinking, though, that has led to the call for government involvement in the arts. So let's look at those four points.

1. Art that isn't supported on its own. It could be that the hoi polloi are all idiots and just don't know good art when they see it. There are people that bear this out, and you simply don't want to get me started on the topic of "deer/antlered animal art." However, generally speaking, if people aren't interested -- not just in buying, but in even viewing or acknowledging or admiring -- there might be a reason. I grant that people in my general geographic area aren't interested in my art. I do sell to people in other places. If you are making art that you absolutely can't find anyone to buy...maybe you're making bad art, maybe you're just ahead of your time, maybe you're a misunderstood and tortured genius. This could lead to an interesting discussion on what makes "good art" and whether or not the general population is able to understand what that is. My take, after years and many, many incidents where people seemed like idiots, is that people know what is good and what isn't. I would also say the general public knows better than the critics and those immersed in some stratospheric "art world." It's hard to admit that I've made my share of bad art and that's why it didn't sell. The general public might not agree with each other and have different tastes, but taken across a broad sample...yes.

2. The squeaky wheel gets the oil. Government involvement means forced fairness. Which isn't fair at all. If there was ever an assurance that crackpot art without any general public interest would get the money, it's in this way. In looking at the photos in the article I linked to, I see a bunch of bad art. Granted, the article outlines a loan plan, which means it isn't technically "free" money and that if some fool wanted to buy a pink spray-painted sad face and then pay back the loan, that is their prerogative. The specific loan program outlined here seems to be an attempt to encourage people to value originality, though I don't know if that really happens when it occurs through government prodding and incentive. My bigger gripe is the money given out in grants to artists of dubious talent and focus rather than this odd loan program. Grant programs are famous for having less to do with the quality of the art and more about the validity or status of the artist.

3. Government programs have to be "fair." This very much ties into what I've said above, and very much ends up not being about supporting art that is good and valid and beautiful, but about who the artist instead. There has to be X number of minorities, X number of genres of art, X number from a certain geographical area based on population, and so on.

4. Talent and hard work aren't rewarded. Studying art in college brought to light the sad truth that many artists graduate an art program and never learn to draw. It may sound silly or unimportant to belabor the issue, but my point is that many artists were "rewarded" with a diploma that says they are "officially artists" while never having learned or bothered to work through the skills that it takes to accomplish the most basic of foundations. You don't have to be a good drawer, or sculptor, or even great at basic art theory in order to make waves in the art world. Set a toilet in the middle of a gallery floor and put up an artist statement full of BS about the state of the environment and modern convenience, and you could probably get yourself a government art grant. That is wrong.

What I find most interesting in all of this is that there seems to be, in my mind, a redundancy in government involvement in art. Millions of dollars are used to help educate youth and adults in after school and summer and evening art classes all around the country, and to fund art competitions, shows, and gallery events. Then, the same entity (the government) helps pay for or support art that isn't always of good quality in the name of being fair and because they are using everyone's money. Essentially, while trying to teach people about making good art and therefore give art a place of value, they are also teaching them about art in a way that has nothing to do with the quality of the art but instead rewards outside factors that really have nothing to do with the art itself.

And, in the process, they still have not addressed the bottom line: our American culture has a mindset that is corrosive to original, higher-priced, unique, time-consuming, low-key, non-electronic, skill-acquired, personally-created art. And frankly, I don't see how government intervention and forced involvement could ever make a serious dent in that.

Discussion: For more discussion or thoughts on this topic, visit this post.
Art, Writing and Books Blog: If there's no audience, does the show go on?

Labels: art

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Creative tools.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 4 comments link this post

I've figured it out.

I've figured out why I like jobs like working the night shift at the Post Office or something along those lines that have nothing to do with writing or art or anything remotely creative.

Writers, artists, and musicians who have the skill, drive, confidence and desire to create on their own, having their own taste and knowing it, are quickly worn out working in a job that seems to be perfect for such skills. Being able to design or write or create on your own terms is very different than being bound in by your boss's terms.

When I design my own posters, graphics or materials for my own use, I love it. It's fun and freeing and exciting; the ideas seem to come out endlessly. When I paint for my own enjoyment rather than commissioned and told what to paint, it is a challenge and a release. When I have to design for another person, or an employer, however, I have to design according to how I know their tastes are and this often clashes with my own personal taste and instinct. It leaves me feeling embarrassed by what I've created and strongly wanting to disassociate my name with it.

Few things are more exhausting than frustrated creativity being hemmed in by boundaries and walls that don't make sense and that I don't even agree with. Suggestions and ideas that are pushed aside only serve to make me doubt my own opinion and ability.

It's not my work, really. It's my skills stripped clean of anything me and used as a tool to create the desires of someone else.

Creative tools aren't pencils and brushes and word processors and instruments. They are frustrated people trying to make a living using their gifts in a way that kills them.

And really, who wants to be a tool?

Labels: art, essay, writing

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Hard-to-find pets.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 3 comments link this post

My friend told me that her nephew wanted an unusual kind of dog.

The dog was, according to the young fellow, to have a yellow head, blue tail, black stripes, and white feet.

That's a kind of dog that's hard to find, even from top-notch specialty breeders. I was asked to help.

I know nothing about dogs. I have opinions on dogs, mind you, but really know very little about them. However...

...being an artist means I do know about yellow, blue, black and white.

Here we have it, this rare dog. Yellow of face, blue of tail, striped in black with white feet. He'll have his dog, after all. Just on paper, of course.

---------------------------

Buy this image as a print here.

Labels: art, friends

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Journals: Deep thoughts on art degrees.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 3 comments link this post

This image is from a page in one of my carry-around journals in which I was considering (or perhaps reconsidering) the direction my art is taking me. It seems I was wondering on my grasp of figurative sketching and anatomy.

He/she lacks a recognizable sternum, I say to myself in my best anatomy-art-class voice.

And speaking of recognize...

You may recognize this character (or at least, similarities) from the recent cartoon series on How to Quit a Job. The same figures have also appeared on a series of Artist Trading Cards I sent to a fellow artist.

I'm not terribly alarmed at my repetitiveness. I tend to go in phases, and sometimes a character or method gets lodged in my brain and I start doodling and drawing it everywhere until one day -- poof. Done. I worked through it.

In the meantime, enjoy.

They are creepy, odd little people. Their teeth make me think they'd rather enjoy it if I fed them carrots. I have no idea why this is. Is that what carrot-loving teeth look like?

I like these characters. I find that they are generally inappropriate and somehow insulting in any setting I depict them, which makes them remarkably easy to write quick story and dialogue for.

Labels: art, journals

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

How to Quit: The dream-on-er.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 3 comments link this post

::Finishing the series on how to quit. Or not.::

| Start |

Who do you think you're kidding?

Labels: art, cartoons, humor, series