Debating point ...

Okay, now the gauntlet has been thrown.

My Drawing and Fundamentals instructor says that illustration does not 'count' as art.

I vehemently disagree. I say that all art can be used as an illustration to some form of story. I also go further to say that any illustration is still art, with or without the accompanying backstory. Look at any of Goya's historical paintings; those have story behind them, and they are considered great art. Even the Cistine Chapel Ceiling can be viewed as an illustration.

Does it matter which came first, the illustration or the story?

What if a story is based around an already existing picture? Does that make the picture an illustration and therefore exempt it from the title of 'artwork'?

I took offense to my instructor's comment, as I am planning on becoming an illustrator as a profession. He gave me the impression that I am striving to be a lesser being than an artist.

Input, anyone?

Ahm feelin' cree-ay-tive too-nite!

Wow... I was stunned by the amount of response (not to mention vehemence) about my last post. Thanks guys. It's great to know that I'm not alone in my beliefs about art and illustration.

And to celebrate ... *drumroll on the desk* ... Here's a story exerpt, complete with an illustration!

( Onward to the blasphemy! )