Interview
Storytelling Through Sci-Fi Art: AN INTERVIEW WITH mICHAEL pAGDON
BY aNDREW bATES, kEVIN cOOPERSMITH, & aMANDA kOZLOWSKI
2016
In Michael Pagdon’s world, society is as alienated as it is populated. Giant robots enforce stripes on would-be zebras, humanoid spiders navigate large oppressive machines, and introspective, half-finished robots contemplate the changes around them. Michael Pagdon has spent over a decade in the Philadelphia arts scene, utilizing his BFA in Illustration from University of the Arts to depict science-fiction and fantasy worlds of highly expressive and emotional subjects. He cites his goal of thorough storytelling and problem-solving as motivation in his work, and his career thus far has provided works that are as aesthetically pleasing as they are haunting.
Glassworks reached out to this New Jersey native in an effort to better understand his creative process and his aspirations. First and foremost, we looked to understand the strong science fiction presence in his works, and how it influences his creative vision.
Glassworks reached out to this New Jersey native in an effort to better understand his creative process and his aspirations. First and foremost, we looked to understand the strong science fiction presence in his works, and how it influences his creative vision.
Glassworks Magazine (GM): A lot of your works carry with them a heavy science fiction theme. The colors are darker with flashes of color that encapsulate the subject, making it easier for someone to identify. Do you do this on purpose? In regards to the subjects of your pieces you often incorporate these themes through high tech landscapes, robots, and/or spider aliens. What is it about science fiction that inspires you?
Michael Pagdon (MP): Yes I do this intentionally but also it’s my sensibilities that come from looking at a lot of Baroque and Academic Art from the 19th century. I love the grey or brown tones, the desaturation of color. As far as what attracts me to science fiction… it’s the questions. The speculation. The storytelling. I love philosophy and aspects of psychology and sociology. Good science fiction analyzes parts of all of these and makes a hypothetical theory based on current and past trends. They are cautionary tales that keep us in check. They are modern day myths and legends with a high tech aesthetic.
GM: What effect do you believe that color in your images has? Do you believe this helps to create the science fiction tone that is repeated throughout your works?
MP: There’s a lot of subtlety in it that is lost when you just use every color in the rainbow. It works sometimes but I just prefer using limited palettes with dark tones and a small glimmer of hope. I would say that in some cases the high contrast values and the bright colors have more appeal to both a science fiction crowd and myself. Sometimes I just like to break up the monotony of using too many dark muddy palettes so I go for a bright science fiction one instead.
GM: In your works, you often depict medieval scenes, robotic subjects, and alien worlds, all common science fiction themes. How did you become so intrigued with drawing in the science fiction genre? Were you as enthralled with the subject as a child? Have you taken any ethical or sociological messages from previous works and introduced them into any specific works of yours? Which ones? Has this idea of “sci-fi” stayed with you from the beginning of your career until now?
MP: When I was growing up, my parents bought me some comics such as Spider-Man and Batman. I was also fixated on Ninja Turtles and Power Rangers for varying periods in my youth. I began to focus more on science fiction when I was introduced to Star Wars. As I grew older, I began to enjoy the ethical and sociological themes in science fiction films such as The Matrix and The Fifth Element and how they were portrayed. I admired how these films and books created worlds that we had never seen before. It was the act of creation that I really loved. To this day this fundamental part of storytelling has stayed with me and I enjoy being both the creator of worlds and the viewer of other’s worlds.
GM: We were surprised to see you break away from your reoccurring genre of science fiction and transition into pieces that depicted modern warfare. The collection of war and the genre, which seemed to us to be common aspect in your works, was extremely intriguing and something different for us to look at compared to your other works. Thinking back to your use of counter-culture, alienation, and gender, what do you think is the key message of your work? When we look at these pieces, the most persistent theme we find is mental anguish and turmoil. Are you hoping to convey this within your pieces? How does the war theme allow you to do this versus the science fiction portion of your art? Do you base this off of your own life or the reoccurring themes in the science fiction genre?
MP: I would say the key feeling, more so than any message, is conflict. One of the reasons a lot of my work shows close ups of one or two individuals as opposed to a group is because I want to focus on what this individual is thinking and show them in a situation where they are not sure of themselves. For most of my life, I had issues with making choices because I don’t want to be wrong. Perhaps that’s why my characters ‘feel’ uncertain. The war theme just brings out different conflicts that science fiction tends to avoid, like a soldier deciding to fight or avoid the draft, or a soldier looking for a way back home. Everything always stems from my life whether it’s intentional or subconscious. If someone tells me a story about how great their day was, except for stubbing their toe, I will focus on that because it is more dramatic than having “a good day”. To me, that negativity or darkness is struggle and struggle is interesting.
GM: Your catalog of work maintains an overarching and distinct counter-cultural feel to it, regardless of each piece’s individual genre. For instance, your war images that have darker portrayals or war views seem as though they could represent the idea of anti-war. How does that relate to your own worldview? However, after going through your work and reading such blogs posts, it could appear as though it is not a physical war but a mental and emotional war within the mind. Are the images based on a literal war or a war within yourself? In which works of yours do you sense you have achieved these ideas and why?
MP: While my views are not strong enough to protest antiwar, I do not agree with it. I like wars for a narrative setting just as I like different time periods. This is the 21st century and it just seems like mankind should have figured a way to work together rather than fight for irrational reasons. As far as my art is concerned, I like the battle of emotions – the choice that a character has to make in contrast to his or her situation, the decision he or she makes versus what is expected to really intrigue me. For example, in Dark Days to Come, there is a man who has just shot his wife. This work was inspired by the film Things to Come, in which mankind sinks into a dark age, which lacks progress but has plenty of death and lunacy. A plague breaks out and no medicine exists to combat it. Dark Days to Come was part of a series of four images and this one had to be the darkest as it captured the lowest point for mankind. I thought about it for a while and realized that my personal hell would to have to decide between my life and my wife’s. Do I let her live only to infect me so we both die together? Or do I kill her to save myself because she’s already gone? I love that battle of rational thought and emotion that echoed the literal war that was going on in the world. Ultimately the illustration shows the man after he has shot his wife and now can’t bear to live with himself. He gets to live but he doesn’t want to now. The composition and landscape wrap around him abstractly because while there is a war outside, this particular situation really captures the essence and mindset.
Michael Pagdon (MP): Yes I do this intentionally but also it’s my sensibilities that come from looking at a lot of Baroque and Academic Art from the 19th century. I love the grey or brown tones, the desaturation of color. As far as what attracts me to science fiction… it’s the questions. The speculation. The storytelling. I love philosophy and aspects of psychology and sociology. Good science fiction analyzes parts of all of these and makes a hypothetical theory based on current and past trends. They are cautionary tales that keep us in check. They are modern day myths and legends with a high tech aesthetic.
GM: What effect do you believe that color in your images has? Do you believe this helps to create the science fiction tone that is repeated throughout your works?
MP: There’s a lot of subtlety in it that is lost when you just use every color in the rainbow. It works sometimes but I just prefer using limited palettes with dark tones and a small glimmer of hope. I would say that in some cases the high contrast values and the bright colors have more appeal to both a science fiction crowd and myself. Sometimes I just like to break up the monotony of using too many dark muddy palettes so I go for a bright science fiction one instead.
GM: In your works, you often depict medieval scenes, robotic subjects, and alien worlds, all common science fiction themes. How did you become so intrigued with drawing in the science fiction genre? Were you as enthralled with the subject as a child? Have you taken any ethical or sociological messages from previous works and introduced them into any specific works of yours? Which ones? Has this idea of “sci-fi” stayed with you from the beginning of your career until now?
MP: When I was growing up, my parents bought me some comics such as Spider-Man and Batman. I was also fixated on Ninja Turtles and Power Rangers for varying periods in my youth. I began to focus more on science fiction when I was introduced to Star Wars. As I grew older, I began to enjoy the ethical and sociological themes in science fiction films such as The Matrix and The Fifth Element and how they were portrayed. I admired how these films and books created worlds that we had never seen before. It was the act of creation that I really loved. To this day this fundamental part of storytelling has stayed with me and I enjoy being both the creator of worlds and the viewer of other’s worlds.
GM: We were surprised to see you break away from your reoccurring genre of science fiction and transition into pieces that depicted modern warfare. The collection of war and the genre, which seemed to us to be common aspect in your works, was extremely intriguing and something different for us to look at compared to your other works. Thinking back to your use of counter-culture, alienation, and gender, what do you think is the key message of your work? When we look at these pieces, the most persistent theme we find is mental anguish and turmoil. Are you hoping to convey this within your pieces? How does the war theme allow you to do this versus the science fiction portion of your art? Do you base this off of your own life or the reoccurring themes in the science fiction genre?
MP: I would say the key feeling, more so than any message, is conflict. One of the reasons a lot of my work shows close ups of one or two individuals as opposed to a group is because I want to focus on what this individual is thinking and show them in a situation where they are not sure of themselves. For most of my life, I had issues with making choices because I don’t want to be wrong. Perhaps that’s why my characters ‘feel’ uncertain. The war theme just brings out different conflicts that science fiction tends to avoid, like a soldier deciding to fight or avoid the draft, or a soldier looking for a way back home. Everything always stems from my life whether it’s intentional or subconscious. If someone tells me a story about how great their day was, except for stubbing their toe, I will focus on that because it is more dramatic than having “a good day”. To me, that negativity or darkness is struggle and struggle is interesting.
GM: Your catalog of work maintains an overarching and distinct counter-cultural feel to it, regardless of each piece’s individual genre. For instance, your war images that have darker portrayals or war views seem as though they could represent the idea of anti-war. How does that relate to your own worldview? However, after going through your work and reading such blogs posts, it could appear as though it is not a physical war but a mental and emotional war within the mind. Are the images based on a literal war or a war within yourself? In which works of yours do you sense you have achieved these ideas and why?
MP: While my views are not strong enough to protest antiwar, I do not agree with it. I like wars for a narrative setting just as I like different time periods. This is the 21st century and it just seems like mankind should have figured a way to work together rather than fight for irrational reasons. As far as my art is concerned, I like the battle of emotions – the choice that a character has to make in contrast to his or her situation, the decision he or she makes versus what is expected to really intrigue me. For example, in Dark Days to Come, there is a man who has just shot his wife. This work was inspired by the film Things to Come, in which mankind sinks into a dark age, which lacks progress but has plenty of death and lunacy. A plague breaks out and no medicine exists to combat it. Dark Days to Come was part of a series of four images and this one had to be the darkest as it captured the lowest point for mankind. I thought about it for a while and realized that my personal hell would to have to decide between my life and my wife’s. Do I let her live only to infect me so we both die together? Or do I kill her to save myself because she’s already gone? I love that battle of rational thought and emotion that echoed the literal war that was going on in the world. Ultimately the illustration shows the man after he has shot his wife and now can’t bear to live with himself. He gets to live but he doesn’t want to now. The composition and landscape wrap around him abstractly because while there is a war outside, this particular situation really captures the essence and mindset.
"Some things are just ambiguous. Life itself is. Not everything has a conclusion or answer."
GM: On the subject of mental anguish, a recurring motif within your work is subjects with their heads juxtaposed in some way. Planet Killer depicts a woman with her head significantly altered while Head Dress shows the subject with their head fused with an automaton. Robot shows the woman with a large piece of her head missing. Does this represent your idea of their eternal mindset? We also noticed that the pieces seemed to relate to one another as well when looking at their depth. Did you create these at a certain point of turmoil in your life? What inspired the darkness and the anguish within these particular pieces?
MP: Planet Killer is separate from my robot paintings because I consider that Planet Killer part of my commercial work whereas the robot paintings are part of a fine art series I have been working on for almost a year. With that series, the robot women are in a dystopian future where mankind created such lifelike robots that we became afraid of our own creations. These mechanical women eventually end up rotting away in dumps and are forgotten. This is a metaphor for my past relationships. I tend to jump into them quickly, and have found that after the “honeymoon phase” it all becomes so artificial. The passion is there but the relationships came off as ingenuine. When you see the robot women missing parts of their heads, it represents the deficiencies that some of my exes had, things that I didn’t see because I rushed into relationships with these individuals. In a way the series shows the deficiencies from my relationships. The turmoil in my romantic life stems from not meeting the right person and being attracted to the wrong person.
GM: Many of your works depict subjects of gender. For instance, your Robot series ranges from a young woman missing part of her cranium to an Asian woman who appears to be entirely metallic. How important is gender in your works? What differs, in your artistic view, between a man and a woman’s thought patterns in your works? In regards to your aesthetic choices, do you envision the science fiction women to look a certain way? What is their role? What about men?
MP: With gender in my work, it really is just about characters. There might be a feeling of vulnerability, a sense of duty, or thoughtfulness that I want in an image. A man or woman is going to have a different sense of those feelings. To me and perhaps to society too, we create stereotypes. Any movie and story uses them and we judge real people based on them. I use women because their emotional bandwidth is wider, or at least it’s easier to believe that than it is for men. When was the last time you saw an emotional man in a movie? Its rare because they are depicted 90% of the time as unemotional, tough, strict, sarcastic etc. Women can we depict the same way but they can be shown as caring, vulnerable and sensitive too. Image if a guy was depicted as that? What would be assumed of that character? What sort of confusion would it create that would then take emphasis away from the story? So I think about character first (their gender included) and then go into more specifics after the personality is flushed out. For aesthetics I also love drawing women more because they just are very fluid and graceful while men are just more rough and blocky.
GM: You said on your blog that the Robot series serves as a way to psychoanalyze yourself. You wrote about how the robot series represents your “emotional detachment in relationships and formulaic approach to them as a defense mechanism due to intimacy issues”. How does the genre style and conventions associated with science fiction help you display themes of mental anguish? Which work in your Robot series fully explains and displays this to your audiences?
MP: If you look at the history of science fiction, it has been utilized to bring up themes such as overpopulation, consequences of nuclear irresponsibility, and environmental concerns. The application of these themes are analytical and scientific. The clinical nature of science fiction seemed to tie into the theme of cold formulaic relationships. It just seemed, to me, an instinctual thing that as time has gone on has revealed connections that I wasn’t necessarily aware of when I started this project? The robot series is meant to show pieces in each picture, connected together as a series. All the themes are not encompassed in one painting because the paintings are meant to get more personal and in-depth as the series progresses. Some early pieces were meant to simply show “these are the types of women I have been involved with” or “these are the kinds of relationships I have been in”. As the series progresses on, some pieces become about specific people. “This is what it was like to date Brandy” or “This might be why this situation happened.” It is meant to draw out more questions than answers because some things are just ambiguous. Life itself is. Not everything has a conclusion or answer.
MP: Planet Killer is separate from my robot paintings because I consider that Planet Killer part of my commercial work whereas the robot paintings are part of a fine art series I have been working on for almost a year. With that series, the robot women are in a dystopian future where mankind created such lifelike robots that we became afraid of our own creations. These mechanical women eventually end up rotting away in dumps and are forgotten. This is a metaphor for my past relationships. I tend to jump into them quickly, and have found that after the “honeymoon phase” it all becomes so artificial. The passion is there but the relationships came off as ingenuine. When you see the robot women missing parts of their heads, it represents the deficiencies that some of my exes had, things that I didn’t see because I rushed into relationships with these individuals. In a way the series shows the deficiencies from my relationships. The turmoil in my romantic life stems from not meeting the right person and being attracted to the wrong person.
GM: Many of your works depict subjects of gender. For instance, your Robot series ranges from a young woman missing part of her cranium to an Asian woman who appears to be entirely metallic. How important is gender in your works? What differs, in your artistic view, between a man and a woman’s thought patterns in your works? In regards to your aesthetic choices, do you envision the science fiction women to look a certain way? What is their role? What about men?
MP: With gender in my work, it really is just about characters. There might be a feeling of vulnerability, a sense of duty, or thoughtfulness that I want in an image. A man or woman is going to have a different sense of those feelings. To me and perhaps to society too, we create stereotypes. Any movie and story uses them and we judge real people based on them. I use women because their emotional bandwidth is wider, or at least it’s easier to believe that than it is for men. When was the last time you saw an emotional man in a movie? Its rare because they are depicted 90% of the time as unemotional, tough, strict, sarcastic etc. Women can we depict the same way but they can be shown as caring, vulnerable and sensitive too. Image if a guy was depicted as that? What would be assumed of that character? What sort of confusion would it create that would then take emphasis away from the story? So I think about character first (their gender included) and then go into more specifics after the personality is flushed out. For aesthetics I also love drawing women more because they just are very fluid and graceful while men are just more rough and blocky.
GM: You said on your blog that the Robot series serves as a way to psychoanalyze yourself. You wrote about how the robot series represents your “emotional detachment in relationships and formulaic approach to them as a defense mechanism due to intimacy issues”. How does the genre style and conventions associated with science fiction help you display themes of mental anguish? Which work in your Robot series fully explains and displays this to your audiences?
MP: If you look at the history of science fiction, it has been utilized to bring up themes such as overpopulation, consequences of nuclear irresponsibility, and environmental concerns. The application of these themes are analytical and scientific. The clinical nature of science fiction seemed to tie into the theme of cold formulaic relationships. It just seemed, to me, an instinctual thing that as time has gone on has revealed connections that I wasn’t necessarily aware of when I started this project? The robot series is meant to show pieces in each picture, connected together as a series. All the themes are not encompassed in one painting because the paintings are meant to get more personal and in-depth as the series progresses. Some early pieces were meant to simply show “these are the types of women I have been involved with” or “these are the kinds of relationships I have been in”. As the series progresses on, some pieces become about specific people. “This is what it was like to date Brandy” or “This might be why this situation happened.” It is meant to draw out more questions than answers because some things are just ambiguous. Life itself is. Not everything has a conclusion or answer.
GM: In addition to the science fiction setting, you inject fantasy elements as well. Medina and CA 9 stand out as a significant departure from your usual futuristic aesthetic with focus on broad and decrepit landscapes with a physical presence. Which of these two genres do you believe suits your style best?
MP: If you are asking which I prefer, science fiction or fantasy, then I am a follower of science fiction all the way. Nothing against fantasy, but I just have stronger ties to science fiction works such as Star Wars, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica. I have always been enticed by the idea of things that could be rather than things that never could. That’s not to say I won’t take a break from science fiction pieces and do a fantasy one every now and then, but the rules are slightly different and the visual styles are much more incestuous in fantasy – fantasy art repeats the same aesthetics without adding new styles or twists generally. Science fiction is usually looking for new visual ideas and progress.
GM: What specifically about science fiction?
MP: I like different types of science fiction, but the best to me are the subtle ones like the Twilight Zone, Ray Bradbury’s writings and Blade Runner. I enjoy quirkier and non-traditional works such as The Fifth Element, Brazil, and The Fountain but the other ones are just more down to Earth. They have one thing in them that makes it science fiction, whether it’s a robot, alien, or technology. The emphasis at the time wasn’t about demonstrating what the technology was or how it could work. It was used as a plot device to show some of humanity’s traits, both good and bad. A lot of science fiction in the 50s and 60s dealt with the potential dangers of nuclear power, even if the story seemed like a movie about aliens on the surface. Others showed us how despite splitting the atom we were not all powerful in the universe. As decades go on we might update the technology and have out own ways of presenting the stories, but at their core the stories are there to point out our flaws and show us how far man can and will fall if we let it happen. These things also do inspire real technology too so that something that was just a fictional creation can become a real one, leading to true progress in the real world as well.
GM: Particularly in Dark Days to Come, your subjects are frequently depicted as alone or alienated from society. What attracts you to feature alienated subjects in your works? Do you feel that their depiction addresses the larger, overarching themes within your work, or does it serve a more personal purpose for you?
MP: Really in any story, the main character is either someone who has always thought outside the box or someone who conforms only to break the mold later. But for me, I think I enjoy showing alienated characters because it helps me relate to them. I have always “gone to the beat of my own drum’, and perhaps that is where these alienated characters I draw come from – I have always wanted to be understood, although I don’t believe that someone truly can completely understand another individual, maybe just the idea of them.
GM: When sitting down and starting your creative process and thinking, ‘I’m going to start a new piece’, where do you draw your inspiration from? Do you go throughout your day and see things, like building or hear a song and start drafting an image in your head of what you want to create? Also, do you sit down and think to yourself, ‘I’m going to draw an alien piece?’ What is your creative process?
MP: I like constraints. The worst thing is for someone to say, “Draw something”. I need at least something to build on. So maybe I want to do another robot painting. It all starts with questions and my sketchbooks are loaded with them. What have I done already in these paintings? What haven’t I done? How can I do the same thing in a new way? Then the questions get more specific as I start doodling compositions – just compositions, no details yet. The design needs to feel unique and purposeful. I try to push myself to do new things. I do this even with something like a random illustration. It’s all about knowing what questions to answer. The more you ask, the more specific the answer and the better your piece will be because it is thoughtful. If you just put two things together to get this story, it’s not enough. It has to come from you. Finding your own language is the hard part and people can usually tell if it’s your voice or someone else’s. That’s the creative part. Craft can be learned. Learning to think is a bit harder, but it can sometimes be taught.
GM: What questions do you seek to answer in your work? In what images can these answers be seen and how?
MP: It depends on the purpose of the piece. Is it commercial or more personal? Once I figure that out then I keep trying to get more specific. Sometimes the questions are meant to clarify a piece and make it better. Sometimes it is the personal growth for the artists to understand themselves. There is a piece on my site called “What if I Miss?” It’s based on the story of William Tell escaping imprisonment by shooting an apple off of his own son’s head. In any story I read I want to do something that hasn’t been done before and/or make an infallible character flawed. In any interpretation I read, Tell didn’t come off as nervous. Every image I saw associated with the story was showing the arrow about to be fired or after it was fired. So after reading the story and seeing images I asked myself “what am I going to do differently?” I start sketching. What do I find interesting about this story or this character? For me it was the conflict of the pro archer being called on his arrogance and now being force to prove it on his son’s life. All my sketches were of the arrow in mid air or about to be released with Tell looking away or sweating. Those are solutions, but not my solution. It felt too easy. Anyone could have come up with that. In my thinking, if I don’t have a meltdown trying to get an idea, it’s not worth painting. So after the escalation in my mind, there is a moment of clarity. What if I show him looking down at the arrow? Considering it, still deciding if he is going to do it. Eventually I decided to show him in a tent, minutes before he has to shoot. Inside he is wondering if he will still shoot. And he is scared. The question on his mind is “what if I miss?” He could kill his son. In front of him is the apple and the arrows wait for him outside. Inside the tent behind his back is a noose showing the consequences of backing out of the challenge and also what can happen if he does miss. It’s behind him because it is the question that is in the back of his mind. All of these things are just steps to get to a final picture.
MP: If you are asking which I prefer, science fiction or fantasy, then I am a follower of science fiction all the way. Nothing against fantasy, but I just have stronger ties to science fiction works such as Star Wars, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica. I have always been enticed by the idea of things that could be rather than things that never could. That’s not to say I won’t take a break from science fiction pieces and do a fantasy one every now and then, but the rules are slightly different and the visual styles are much more incestuous in fantasy – fantasy art repeats the same aesthetics without adding new styles or twists generally. Science fiction is usually looking for new visual ideas and progress.
GM: What specifically about science fiction?
MP: I like different types of science fiction, but the best to me are the subtle ones like the Twilight Zone, Ray Bradbury’s writings and Blade Runner. I enjoy quirkier and non-traditional works such as The Fifth Element, Brazil, and The Fountain but the other ones are just more down to Earth. They have one thing in them that makes it science fiction, whether it’s a robot, alien, or technology. The emphasis at the time wasn’t about demonstrating what the technology was or how it could work. It was used as a plot device to show some of humanity’s traits, both good and bad. A lot of science fiction in the 50s and 60s dealt with the potential dangers of nuclear power, even if the story seemed like a movie about aliens on the surface. Others showed us how despite splitting the atom we were not all powerful in the universe. As decades go on we might update the technology and have out own ways of presenting the stories, but at their core the stories are there to point out our flaws and show us how far man can and will fall if we let it happen. These things also do inspire real technology too so that something that was just a fictional creation can become a real one, leading to true progress in the real world as well.
GM: Particularly in Dark Days to Come, your subjects are frequently depicted as alone or alienated from society. What attracts you to feature alienated subjects in your works? Do you feel that their depiction addresses the larger, overarching themes within your work, or does it serve a more personal purpose for you?
MP: Really in any story, the main character is either someone who has always thought outside the box or someone who conforms only to break the mold later. But for me, I think I enjoy showing alienated characters because it helps me relate to them. I have always “gone to the beat of my own drum’, and perhaps that is where these alienated characters I draw come from – I have always wanted to be understood, although I don’t believe that someone truly can completely understand another individual, maybe just the idea of them.
GM: When sitting down and starting your creative process and thinking, ‘I’m going to start a new piece’, where do you draw your inspiration from? Do you go throughout your day and see things, like building or hear a song and start drafting an image in your head of what you want to create? Also, do you sit down and think to yourself, ‘I’m going to draw an alien piece?’ What is your creative process?
MP: I like constraints. The worst thing is for someone to say, “Draw something”. I need at least something to build on. So maybe I want to do another robot painting. It all starts with questions and my sketchbooks are loaded with them. What have I done already in these paintings? What haven’t I done? How can I do the same thing in a new way? Then the questions get more specific as I start doodling compositions – just compositions, no details yet. The design needs to feel unique and purposeful. I try to push myself to do new things. I do this even with something like a random illustration. It’s all about knowing what questions to answer. The more you ask, the more specific the answer and the better your piece will be because it is thoughtful. If you just put two things together to get this story, it’s not enough. It has to come from you. Finding your own language is the hard part and people can usually tell if it’s your voice or someone else’s. That’s the creative part. Craft can be learned. Learning to think is a bit harder, but it can sometimes be taught.
GM: What questions do you seek to answer in your work? In what images can these answers be seen and how?
MP: It depends on the purpose of the piece. Is it commercial or more personal? Once I figure that out then I keep trying to get more specific. Sometimes the questions are meant to clarify a piece and make it better. Sometimes it is the personal growth for the artists to understand themselves. There is a piece on my site called “What if I Miss?” It’s based on the story of William Tell escaping imprisonment by shooting an apple off of his own son’s head. In any story I read I want to do something that hasn’t been done before and/or make an infallible character flawed. In any interpretation I read, Tell didn’t come off as nervous. Every image I saw associated with the story was showing the arrow about to be fired or after it was fired. So after reading the story and seeing images I asked myself “what am I going to do differently?” I start sketching. What do I find interesting about this story or this character? For me it was the conflict of the pro archer being called on his arrogance and now being force to prove it on his son’s life. All my sketches were of the arrow in mid air or about to be released with Tell looking away or sweating. Those are solutions, but not my solution. It felt too easy. Anyone could have come up with that. In my thinking, if I don’t have a meltdown trying to get an idea, it’s not worth painting. So after the escalation in my mind, there is a moment of clarity. What if I show him looking down at the arrow? Considering it, still deciding if he is going to do it. Eventually I decided to show him in a tent, minutes before he has to shoot. Inside he is wondering if he will still shoot. And he is scared. The question on his mind is “what if I miss?” He could kill his son. In front of him is the apple and the arrows wait for him outside. Inside the tent behind his back is a noose showing the consequences of backing out of the challenge and also what can happen if he does miss. It’s behind him because it is the question that is in the back of his mind. All of these things are just steps to get to a final picture.
