Why the **** have I got to answer that? What has it got to do with me? I'm not a trying to draw a cartoon of Serena Williams!
Why don't you draw one and I'll tell you if I think it's racist or not.
Racist! Really?
- Thread starter koolpc
- Start date
Why the **** have I got to answer that? What has it got to do with me? I'm not a trying to draw a cartoon of Serena Williams!
Why don't you draw one and I'll tell you if I think it's racist or not.
You're the one spouting off about how it's racist. That's what it's got to do with you.
.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 5,980
- Location
- Essex
Looks to be racist how the umpire is being portrayed, they're not all middle aged posh white men with big roman noses.
Why are they drawing so much attention to his big roman nose and skinny white man legs?! I feel VIOLATED.
Why are they drawing so much attention to his big roman nose and skinny white man legs?! I feel VIOLATED.
Thought as much.....
Because you have suggested this cartoon is racist.... When challenged on this you have stated it resembles some of the features of 'old tom' (uncle tom / mammy) caricatures.. ..
I have pointed out that both the Serena cartoon and Uncle tom / Mammy caricatures contain features that are stereotypical of sub saharan African features.
And as I suggest Serena does have these features I am enquiring as to how you could caricature her accurately (within the bounds of caricature as an art form) without producing a cartoon that at least in part resembled parts of a uncle tom / mammy caricature.
I have pointed out that uncle tom / mammy were normally fictional and also contained additional elements that made them more obviously racist where as Serena's cartoon satires the actual appearance and actions of a person.
According to Inogen: You aren't allowed to draw people like that.
OK Inogen, how can we draw them?
Inogen: Why the **** are you asking me that?
Come on...
And you're someone spouting off that it's not.
Like i said earlier in the thread. All very reminiscent of a conversation I have had with a racist relative of mine, who thinks it's acceptable to use words that rhyme with racist language as placeholders when saying racist things.
They say "well what should i say then?". Like the onus is on me to provide them with language I consider to be less offensive.
They say "well what should i say then?". Like the onus is on me to provide them with language I consider to be less offensive.
Exactly. You're the one calling for change. Not us.
No one is disputing the shading used. Yes she is given a darker skin colour than the umpire, but that is irrelevant.
Both the umpire and the opponent are clearly not supposed to be the umpire that was there + Osaka because they look absolutely nothing alike. The artist has not even attempted to make them resemble the people that were actually there. If he did , he would have at least attempted to get the hair right for Osaka, or at least attempted to depict the umpire similarly.
I'm awful at drawing but it took me 2 seconds to actually make this look like Osaka, which the artist could have done if he wanted to:
https://s8.~postimg.cc~/p1c2ssi79/Osaka.jpg
Can you seriously, with a straight face tell me that if someone showed you this:
https://s8.~postimg.cc~/n9j3xw6k5/woman.jpg
..that you would think that was anything other than a caucasian woman with long blonde straight hair?
If you then looked at the picture of Serena, you would immediately ascertain that it was a drawing of a black woman. There is zero doubt in that.
The choice of the straight long blonde hair and the much lighter skin colour used (compared with Serena) unfortunately makes it look like he has just stuck two skinny caucasian people in the background as direct contrast to the oversized (and oddly fat looking) Serena caricature.
I will say again, i don't think it was intentional by the artist, but i find it odd how so many in this thread are refusing to see why the picture has been interpreted in the way that it has by some people
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,226
- Location
- London
Do you know how small that pic would be when it's printed in a newspaper?
Anyway, it's already been explained to you multiple times that she isn't the focal point of the image and you're making something out of nothing.
Anyway, it's already been explained to you multiple times that she isn't the focal point of the image and you're making something out of nothing.
W H A T A B O U T E R Y
Its nothing like using rhyming slang for actual racial slurs. The equivalent here would have been something like giving Serena a handkerchief in her hair, in the mammy style, but changing the colour to blue rather then the stereotypical red as depicted in actual racist caricatures.
If you looked at the part of the cartoon covering the crowd, in isolation, having not seen the original could you tell it was meant to depict a crowd of humans?
It could I suggest be mistaken for something like animal skin if taken out of its context..... Thats the beauty of drawings like this.... They are more then the sum of their parts.
When you look at the whole picture you can see that Serena is darker skinned then Osaka who is herself darker skinned then the umpire like they are in real life. Both Serena and Osaka are depicted as being paller in the cartoon then the normally look on TV likely due to the issues with printing the cartoon (see below)
When you consider that newspaper artists have to consider colour reproduction within the limited range available for newspaper printing then the choice of colours doesn't appear that surprising.
Last edited:
But it quite clearly isn't a drawing of Osaka. That is all i'm saying.
https://s8.~postimg.cc~/n9j3xw6k5/woman.jpg
Or it is and, he is literally the worst artist in the world and didnt attempt to get anything about how she looks correct.
You know as well as i do, why the opponent has been perceived as being a skinny caucasian blonde woman...because that is exactly what it looks like.
But it quite clearly isn't a drawing of Osaka
https://s8.~postimg.cc~/n9j3xw6k5/woman.jpg
Or it is and, he is literally the worst artist in the world.
And Serena is darker skinned then the cartoon shows her because you can't depict much detail, in print, with darker colours.
So the artist keeps the large black sections on her clothing (which contain little detail) but lightens Serena's skin tone to retain shadow / highlight detail.
Having done this he then has to lighten Osaka's skin tone and then the umpire has to appear even paler to retain consistency.
All of this irrelevant. It looks like what it looks like, hence the controversy.
If he had at least attempted to make it looks somewhat like Osaka ( like the example i did with the hair) , i'm sure people wouldn't have seen it so unfavorably.
As an artist ( or anyone who has a job in creating works that are published in the public sphere) it is always important to make sure you havent inadvertently drawn or written something that can be perceived in a different way to that which you intended. Which unfortunately is what i think has happened here.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,226
- Location
- London
He's been told that God knows how many times...
It not at all irrelevant a commercial artist has to understand the medium(s) their art is going to be produced on.
Its all very well looking at an image on a monitor or phone capable of reproducing a large colour gamut, including reproducing lots of shadow and highlight detail with darker colours and saying we'll the artist could have easily made Osaka (and necessarily Serena) darker skinned.....
But the the artist here was producing art for both print and digital reproduction so had to consider the restrictions of a much smaller colour gamut in print.