Hello,
I was curious to know if any of our members (Etutee, Manton?) here with knowledge of how the creation of the Apparel Arts & Esquire illustrations was accomplished would care to go into a bit of detail describing said process? Was it a situation where the editors provided a conceptual idea to the artists and it developed from there, or were the artists actually much more instrumental in the creative process? I do know that one mission of the illustrations was to show innovative and/or popular fashions worn by smarter dressers in various locales. I ask because I am a student with a passion for the arts, both sartorial and visual, who has a serious interest in pursuing an endeavor of creating similar illustrations. I wonder if there is a market for such illustrations in the media or privately. Anyway, thank you gentlemen for your time and I eagerly await your response.
Apparel Arts & Esquire
understated,
I too am interested (I might almost say "passionately so") in the AA/Esky fashion plates and their illustrators--especially the dean of them all, Laurence Fellows. Information about these people and processes is hard to come by. In his memoir Nothing But People: The Early Days at Esquire (Crown, 1971), Arnold Gingrich, the founding editor, prefers to spin anecdotes about Fitzgerald andf Hemingway, not to mention forgettable contributors like Andreas Latzko and Eric Knight, to crediting the unsung stars of his team, the fashion illustrators. At least that's what I've gleaned from the not-overly-adequate index to Gingrich's book--which I have not yet perused in its entirety.
I hope you'll find out plenty about the highly-skilled artists and editors who did so much to shape the sartorial perceptions of the Classic Era--and who continue to do so to this day.
I too am interested (I might almost say "passionately so") in the AA/Esky fashion plates and their illustrators--especially the dean of them all, Laurence Fellows. Information about these people and processes is hard to come by. In his memoir Nothing But People: The Early Days at Esquire (Crown, 1971), Arnold Gingrich, the founding editor, prefers to spin anecdotes about Fitzgerald andf Hemingway, not to mention forgettable contributors like Andreas Latzko and Eric Knight, to crediting the unsung stars of his team, the fashion illustrators. At least that's what I've gleaned from the not-overly-adequate index to Gingrich's book--which I have not yet perused in its entirety.
I hope you'll find out plenty about the highly-skilled artists and editors who did so much to shape the sartorial perceptions of the Classic Era--and who continue to do so to this day.
I’ve spent hours doing research about these illustrators without much success. The research would probably not pass peer review, and the methodology probably has some flaws. I’ve found musing like mine, but not a footnote or any other trappings of academic rigor to be found.
Some of the works are pen and ink, some watercolor, and others oil on canvas. I’ve been unable to find a catalogue raisonné for Lawrence Fellows (alt. Laurence), Robert Goodman, or Hurd to find out what else they did. Nor is it really clear where they left their papers, if any place. From what I’ve been able to piece together, Fellows spent the latter part of his life in the New Hope, Pennsylvania area. The Society of Illustrators does not have much information either. You’ll find that the most written about Leyendecker and Saalburg. We are probably lucky with Saalburg because of his work regarding automobiles. And, there much more about Rockwell and Petty. Now, Paul Rand is an entirely different story, but I’m straying from the topic. There is lot written by and about Rand, and his papers are at Yale
I was hoping that the new electronic version of The New Yorker would help a little, but the program (for purely copyright reasons) is very difficult to use. (So much for being able to canvas all of O’Hara’s writings easily.) There is some text in the Encyclopedia and the other little book by Schoeffler about the illustrators. A friend of mine saw either Schoeffler or Gale on the street a few months ago. It might be worth tracking whichever one it was to do a through interview. (One of them I think has died.)
When you read some of Gingrich’s text, he changes and often takes issue with the illustrations. These changes may or may not speak to the issue of how much editorial direction there was.
We may never for know for purely practical reasons. The budgets were small. The publications were a outgrowth of Coronet. Issues about archives and posterity were not at the forefront.
Some of the works are pen and ink, some watercolor, and others oil on canvas. I’ve been unable to find a catalogue raisonné for Lawrence Fellows (alt. Laurence), Robert Goodman, or Hurd to find out what else they did. Nor is it really clear where they left their papers, if any place. From what I’ve been able to piece together, Fellows spent the latter part of his life in the New Hope, Pennsylvania area. The Society of Illustrators does not have much information either. You’ll find that the most written about Leyendecker and Saalburg. We are probably lucky with Saalburg because of his work regarding automobiles. And, there much more about Rockwell and Petty. Now, Paul Rand is an entirely different story, but I’m straying from the topic. There is lot written by and about Rand, and his papers are at Yale
I was hoping that the new electronic version of The New Yorker would help a little, but the program (for purely copyright reasons) is very difficult to use. (So much for being able to canvas all of O’Hara’s writings easily.) There is some text in the Encyclopedia and the other little book by Schoeffler about the illustrators. A friend of mine saw either Schoeffler or Gale on the street a few months ago. It might be worth tracking whichever one it was to do a through interview. (One of them I think has died.)
When you read some of Gingrich’s text, he changes and often takes issue with the illustrations. These changes may or may not speak to the issue of how much editorial direction there was.
We may never for know for purely practical reasons. The budgets were small. The publications were a outgrowth of Coronet. Issues about archives and posterity were not at the forefront.
Based on what I have read in the original sources (i.e., Esquire and Apparel Arts), the process worked something like this.
Gingrich and all of his top editors were well dressed and interested in clothes. They watched the trends out of personal as much as professional interest. The same can be said of the illustrators. Also, these guys were, if not in every instance upper class, then at least hangers on. They went to the "right" clubs and social events and shopped in the "right" stores. So they knew what promiment men were wearing.
Based on what they observed on the street, and what they knew from observation "high society" was wearing, they commissioned the illustrations. The point was to report what the "best" men were wearing in a given season. They use the word "fashion" quite often and without embarassment or irony. As the years wore on, they became more rigid, but that's because practices ossified and the concept of "correct" attire took hold.
The idea behind the illustrations was to inform the average middle and upper middle class man. It was not to peddle this or that look or designer or brand. These things are in fact never mentioned. A man was supposed to look at the pictures and get ideas, not necessarily copy entire ensembles. He might see a something he liked and go to his tailor and say "I want something like that." The tailor might not have access to that exact cloth, but he might have something close. Or he might suggest an alternative that accomplishes much the same thing. Althought they use the term "oufit" sometimes, the do not mean it in the modern sense, that is, a head-to-toe ensemble in which each piece had to go together. They strongly encouraged men only to buy things that could be worn with many other things.
The other purpose was to instruct, through examples, how to coordinate fabrics, colors and patterns. Once you learn the principles it gets easier and you are less reliant on copying the illustrations garment for garment. You might see a donegal suit in one picture worn with a blue tie, but based on what you've seen elsewhere you intuit that it might work with a green tie. So you try it.
The illustrations thus inspired men (or were supposed to inspire them) to learn and experiment.
Gingrich and all of his top editors were well dressed and interested in clothes. They watched the trends out of personal as much as professional interest. The same can be said of the illustrators. Also, these guys were, if not in every instance upper class, then at least hangers on. They went to the "right" clubs and social events and shopped in the "right" stores. So they knew what promiment men were wearing.
Based on what they observed on the street, and what they knew from observation "high society" was wearing, they commissioned the illustrations. The point was to report what the "best" men were wearing in a given season. They use the word "fashion" quite often and without embarassment or irony. As the years wore on, they became more rigid, but that's because practices ossified and the concept of "correct" attire took hold.
The idea behind the illustrations was to inform the average middle and upper middle class man. It was not to peddle this or that look or designer or brand. These things are in fact never mentioned. A man was supposed to look at the pictures and get ideas, not necessarily copy entire ensembles. He might see a something he liked and go to his tailor and say "I want something like that." The tailor might not have access to that exact cloth, but he might have something close. Or he might suggest an alternative that accomplishes much the same thing. Althought they use the term "oufit" sometimes, the do not mean it in the modern sense, that is, a head-to-toe ensemble in which each piece had to go together. They strongly encouraged men only to buy things that could be worn with many other things.
The other purpose was to instruct, through examples, how to coordinate fabrics, colors and patterns. Once you learn the principles it gets easier and you are less reliant on copying the illustrations garment for garment. You might see a donegal suit in one picture worn with a blue tie, but based on what you've seen elsewhere you intuit that it might work with a green tie. So you try it.
The illustrations thus inspired men (or were supposed to inspire them) to learn and experiment.
Last edited by manton on Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Richard Merkin, the celebrated artist, author, and dandy, wrote a great piece on Apparel Arts, Esquire and the illustrators (Saalburg, Fellows, Hurd) in a 1990s GQ. Also there was a small book on the origins of Esquire illustrations that was published in the 1990s with a great essay in the introduction that traced the evolution of the illustrations from the 1930s through the 1950s. Lastly, an Italian publisher produced a three volume set of "the best of Apparel Arts" of which Bruce Boyer wrote an incredible essay at the beginning.
ecmoys post is very interesting. I remember Merkin"s monthly GQ pieces in the times when it was a much more grown-up and interesting magazine than todays travesty.
If he or anyone has further details on the Italian Best of Apparel Arts books I would be very grateful. The internet searches yield nothing as far as I can see.
If he or anyone has further details on the Italian Best of Apparel Arts books I would be very grateful. The internet searches yield nothing as far as I can see.
I have the Italian reprint. It is VERY hard to find. I love it, but I think they included a lot of useless articles in the reprint. But what's good is very good indeed.
It was first published privately by Grupo GFT (not a publishing company) in 1989. In that edition the essays are in Italian but the Apparel Arts text is in English. (Everything after the opening essays is just a photo reprint; nothing is reset.)
Then it was republished in 1992 by Electa and sold through Rizzoli. The essays of this edition were translated into English.
Then it was republished in 1992 by Electa and sold through Rizzoli. The essays of this edition were translated into English.
Richard Merkin's articles were great. I have several saved as clippings--I've often thought a collection in book form would be nice to have. Merkin might be someone you could contact for direction on your research--he's still kickin'. I remember him being a fan of Ralph Barton and Covarrubius---he is an artist himself, taught at RISD, I believe, and has a very small piece on a new jazz book in the current Vanity Fair. He was featured in the 'contributors' section with a photo.
Merkin seems like a kindred spirit of some here and might be very helpful to you. If I may be so bold I seem to remember Merkin writing about his aquaintance with one of the LL's members: Mr. Eddie Hayes.
Merkin seems like a kindred spirit of some here and might be very helpful to you. If I may be so bold I seem to remember Merkin writing about his aquaintance with one of the LL's members: Mr. Eddie Hayes.
-
understated
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:45 am
- Contact:
Thank you all very much for your kind and helpful responses. It has truly been a pleasure to read how many are inspired by the AA/Esky illustrations.
JMurphy: I was actually thinking after reading some replies of attempting to contact Mr. Merkin. However, I'm not quite sure how to go about that, and much worse, I fear that it may be an intrusion upon his privacy. I will be moving to New York within a few months and from some of the info I've found from looking online, he seems to make appearances there from time to time.
Thanks again everyone for all of your help.
JMurphy: I was actually thinking after reading some replies of attempting to contact Mr. Merkin. However, I'm not quite sure how to go about that, and much worse, I fear that it may be an intrusion upon his privacy. I will be moving to New York within a few months and from some of the info I've found from looking online, he seems to make appearances there from time to time.
Thanks again everyone for all of your help.
Understated: nothing ventured, nothing gained. But I'm an optimist--I'd like to think RM might be flattered to hear from you on the topic and would be thrilled to talk to you. Granted, I don't know him and he could be a little shrew of a hermit but I don't get that sense--he has a nice-sized public presence.
At any rate, good luck with your quest--please keep us informed as to your progress.
At any rate, good luck with your quest--please keep us informed as to your progress.
I too have the 3 volume Apparel Arts reprint, but mine is also in Italian. I think Gallager's in the Village still has copy (that's where I got mine), but I think that copy is incomplete.
The Library of Congress has a version in English, and I ordered a copy Boyer's introduction. If anyone wants a copy, I can send you a PDF of it. Is there a way to post PDFs here? (There are some citation problems if you try to compare it to cites Mens Coats.)
As for Merkin, there is a picture of him in this month's Vanity Fair. He wrote a very small blurb. He is a client of Flusser's, if anyone wants to work that angle.
The Library of Congress has a version in English, and I ordered a copy Boyer's introduction. If anyone wants a copy, I can send you a PDF of it. Is there a way to post PDFs here? (There are some citation problems if you try to compare it to cites Mens Coats.)
As for Merkin, there is a picture of him in this month's Vanity Fair. He wrote a very small blurb. He is a client of Flusser's, if anyone wants to work that angle.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 26 guests