HUMOUROUS ART.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIII, Issue 19, 5 January 1923, Page 2

HUMOUROUS ART.

PAST AND PRESENT COMPARED.

IS THE LAUGHTER-MAKING GENIUS OF AUSTRALASIA DECADENT? (By “Phiz.”) Black and white art has always provided a rich vein of enjoyment for the laughter loving public’ of Australia and New Zealand. AVe, m the latter country, while we can derive satisfaction from the fact that we have given several brilliant men to the world, can find nothing to enthuse over (in the class of comic art being produced in this Dominion. Certainly humorous line work has never been at such a low ebb in New Zealand as it is at the present day. Only three or four men can be placed ’as producing anything worth while, and as for the remainder, they are as yet very much in the amateur stage. The only brilbant man we had recently has been Tom Glover who has been appropriated by the Sydney “Bulletin” to act as their Melbourne cartoonist. Glover is a distinct loss to this country. He caricatured Mr. Massey almost as well as Air. David Low caricatured Air Hughes when lie was associated with the “Bulletin” a few years back. Now that he has gone there is a splendid opportunity for another man to step into his shoes and take the lead as the, foremost cartoonist of the Dominion.

HOAV AUSTRALIA IS FARING. Although the shortage of good comic artists is not so apparent on the other side of the Tasman it cannot be said that the cartoon and caricature work now being produced for the Australian papers is anything nearly as brilliant as, it was in former years, in fact Australia never seems to have quite recovered from the blow of losing Day id Low, the one-time Alaorila nd artist who is now making fame and fortune in London. The genius of Norman Lindsay is still with Australia, but the famous creator of “Billie Bluegum” is concentrating more on the serious side of his work and the laughter loving public miss him sorely on this account. However, are several comparatively new men who are making good. A fair index to the progress in thig respect is provided in the pages of ‘'Aussie,” the bright monthly magazine. Not only are .the well-known men seen in this magazine but the budding comic artists of Australia and New Zealand are given a chance. Then in other Australian papers was ’to be seen the work of some clever artists, notably Finey (an Auckland boy) who is fast developing as a brilliant caricaturist. In the pages of “The Bulletin” also Tom Glover can be seen making big towards more finished and more characteristic work. Here also can be seen an artist of marked individuality, Leason whose pictures of farm, lira lire remarkably clever. 810 NAMES W- THE PAST.

Yet m all these men I cannot as yet see the stroke ~qf genius. If I should speculate on possible genius I would perhaps select the amazing caricatures of Finey and the vivid humour and original work of Noel Cook, the latter of whom contributes his best work to “Aussie.” Small wonder is it that the critics sadly shake their heads and say that Australasian comic art has fallen off within recent years. They point to the days of Phil Alay, to the period when Norman Lindsay gave the best of his humourous line work to the “Bulletin,” when “Hop” enlivened its pages with some of;his most brilliant efforts, when the late Alf. A T incent, following in th.o#4’ootsteps of Phil Afay, portrayed in"b.rqad, bold line the humours of the day. when AVill Dyson produceqrais almost cruelly clever caricatures. ' Theikxjliey refer to a few years bficK wfieTK\S§-vid Low made “Billee” in. all the diabolical cleverness of ture. The critics say. that we enie no equals of these pioneers. W--: LACK OF ENCOURAGEMENT;'■ The point arises hefe: Have th.enewspapers and magazines of Australia and New Zealand given sufficient; encouragement to the aspiring black and white man? Have they sought to develop the possible genius in our midst? I cannot say they have. Too much importance is placed ;on the name of the artist and not eiiqngh on the genuine merit of the contributor. The modest beginner must submit something of outstanding merit before his work is even considered. But here 1 must give credit to one paper at least that is out to encourage budding talent. This is “Aussie,” the magazine already referred to in this article. “Aussie” claims to given an open field to every artist, and writer too. in Australasia. That great good has resulted is proved hy the fact that this paper has made several “discoveries’’ in Australasian art and literature. The names of Syd. Miller. P. Pitchfield aind Roy Agnew may be mentioned. In the forthcoming New Zealand section in “Aussie’,’ New Zealand writers and artists will be given a chance they have ’never had before and that alongside names already well known to the public. Such encouragement of talent must have an important bearing on the future of Australasian art and letters.