Journal of illustration 12.2
The second issue of the Blindspots Volume, emerging from the 13th Annual Illustration Research Symposium at Washington University in St. Louis (2023), deepens a collective inquiry into a deceptively simple question: what has illustration research failed to see — and why does it matter?
Marking ten years of the Journal of Illustration, this issue arrives at a moment of disciplinary maturity and renewed scrutiny. Over a decade, illustration has grown from an overlooked subject into a thriving field of scholarship — prompting researchers to ask what knowledge remains underexplored, and where the blind spots persist.
Marking ten years of the Journal of Illustration, this issue arrives at a moment of disciplinary maturity and renewed scrutiny. Over a decade, illustration has grown from an overlooked subject into a thriving field of scholarship — prompting researchers to ask what knowledge remains underexplored, and where the blind spots persist.
The Journal of Illustration Volume 12 Issue 2 ‘Blind spots’ is out now!
The second issue of the Blindspots Volume arrives as both continuation and provocation. Emerging from the 13th Annual Illustration Research Symposium at Washington University in St. Louis (2023), it deepens the collective inquiry begun by art and cultural historians, practitioners, and practitioner-researchers united by a deceptively simple question: so far, what did illustration research fail to see — and why does it matter?
The second issue of the Blindspots Volume arrives as both continuation and provocation. Emerging from the 13th Annual Illustration Research Symposium at Washington University in St. Louis (2023), it deepens the collective inquiry begun by art and cultural historians, practitioners, and practitioner-researchers united by a deceptively simple question: so far, what did illustration research fail to see — and why does it matter?
Ten years since the inception of the Journal of Illustration, the field has transitioned from an overlooked critical subject to a valid, thriving, and growing area of scholarship — instrumental in establishing illustration practice as a legitimate field of study. This maturation prompted the research community to ask: if we are to build a comprehensive and holistic understanding of what illustration is and does, what areas of knowledge remain essential to develop? What has so far been overlooked, avoided, or concealed? Where are the blind spots?
With twelve diverse articles, this issue continues to reflect on underrepresented ideas and perspectives, implicitly asking what urgent questions illustration research should foreground in the coming years. It brings together historical, theoretical, and practice-based perspectives on the discipline and its contexts, demonstrating the necessity for distinct frameworks to address these questions. Art historical, sociological, theoretical, and creative practice-based methodologies complement one another, helping to weave, as well as underlining, the identity and discourse around how we understand illustration as a lens, a discipline, and a field of research.
Many articles in this issue foreground illustration's intersections with the social and technological challenges of our rapidly changing world. They illuminate areas of the unknown and newly emerging, interrogating themes with deep historical roots while offering unsettling provocations about the discipline's future.
D.B. Dowd, in conversation with Danielle Ridolfi, calls for illustration history to be recognised as essential to both practice and scholarship and to underline this, Lina Vekeman brings the focus on Alastair’s illustrations of Walter Pater’s Imaginary Portraits. Meanwhile, Vincent Larkin and Pete Williams suggest that originality and the authorial position are fast losing relevance in the age of artificial intelligence. As a counterpoint, Maelle Daub and Hilde Kramer remind us of the essential haptic and tactile dimensions of the creative process. How these two positions — the computer-generated and the handmade — will ultimately converge remains an open and pressing question.
Selen Sarikaya Eren offers a different perspective altogether, shifting focus away from technology to argue for understanding illustration as a human-centered, sociological phenomenon — one from which questions of technology and form should flow, rather than the reverse.
This human-centered emphasis is carried through by Paula Heister's examination of the representation of medical professionals, Daniel Yzbeck and Christina Knopf's discussion of the decoration of military hardware to support troop morale, Larkin's analysis of digital platform culture, and Kramer's exploration of specific sensory needs. Together, these contributions move beyond aesthetic or methodological concerns to illuminate how illustration is embedded in the social fabric — how it can assist or empower overlooked and marginalised communities.
Collectively, the articles ask us to reconsider what we regard as overlooked, what we recognise as social need, and what assumptions underpin traditional ideas of marginalisation. As Caroline Shapiro urges, we should not only seek to explore our blind spots, but examine what we choose to illuminate — and remain mindful of the shadows that choice may cast.
With twelve diverse articles, this issue continues to reflect on underrepresented ideas and perspectives, implicitly asking what urgent questions illustration research should foreground in the coming years. It brings together historical, theoretical, and practice-based perspectives on the discipline and its contexts, demonstrating the necessity for distinct frameworks to address these questions. Art historical, sociological, theoretical, and creative practice-based methodologies complement one another, helping to weave, as well as underlining, the identity and discourse around how we understand illustration as a lens, a discipline, and a field of research.
Many articles in this issue foreground illustration's intersections with the social and technological challenges of our rapidly changing world. They illuminate areas of the unknown and newly emerging, interrogating themes with deep historical roots while offering unsettling provocations about the discipline's future.
D.B. Dowd, in conversation with Danielle Ridolfi, calls for illustration history to be recognised as essential to both practice and scholarship and to underline this, Lina Vekeman brings the focus on Alastair’s illustrations of Walter Pater’s Imaginary Portraits. Meanwhile, Vincent Larkin and Pete Williams suggest that originality and the authorial position are fast losing relevance in the age of artificial intelligence. As a counterpoint, Maelle Daub and Hilde Kramer remind us of the essential haptic and tactile dimensions of the creative process. How these two positions — the computer-generated and the handmade — will ultimately converge remains an open and pressing question.
Selen Sarikaya Eren offers a different perspective altogether, shifting focus away from technology to argue for understanding illustration as a human-centered, sociological phenomenon — one from which questions of technology and form should flow, rather than the reverse.
This human-centered emphasis is carried through by Paula Heister's examination of the representation of medical professionals, Daniel Yzbeck and Christina Knopf's discussion of the decoration of military hardware to support troop morale, Larkin's analysis of digital platform culture, and Kramer's exploration of specific sensory needs. Together, these contributions move beyond aesthetic or methodological concerns to illuminate how illustration is embedded in the social fabric — how it can assist or empower overlooked and marginalised communities.
Collectively, the articles ask us to reconsider what we regard as overlooked, what we recognise as social need, and what assumptions underpin traditional ideas of marginalisation. As Caroline Shapiro urges, we should not only seek to explore our blind spots, but examine what we choose to illuminate — and remain mindful of the shadows that choice may cast.
Issue contents
With a book review Fragmentary Forms: A New History of Collage, Freya Gowrley (2024) by Aggie Toppins.
Edited by Nanette Hoogslag and Danielle Ridolfi.
https://www.intellectbooks.com/journal-of-illustration
Edited by Nanette Hoogslag and Danielle Ridolfi.
https://www.intellectbooks.com/journal-of-illustration
Nanette Hoogslag, Danielle Ridolfi – Editorial
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00128_2
Carolyn Shapiro – The blind spot of the blind spot: Conspiracy theory as ‘illustration’
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00129_3
Danielle Ridolfi – Reading pictures and teaching history: A conversation with D. B. Dowd
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00130_7
Vincent Larkin – DeviantArt: Data and the divided self
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00122_1
Pete Williams – Tears and rain: Part 3 – Resurrection: Phase IV
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00125_1
Selen Sarikaya Eren – Illustrating dissent: What can social movement studies learn from illustration research?
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00123_1
Paula Heister – From gods in white coats to wounded healers: Representations of doctors in picturebooks
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00120_1
Christina M. Knopf, Daniel F. Yezbick – Bombs and bombshells, aluminium and lace: Milton Caniff at the intersection of illustration and insignia in the Second World War
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00126_1
Lina Vekeman – ‘Read between the lines of Pater and look between the lines of Alastair’s figures’: Walter Pater and Alastair’s Sebastian van Storck
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00124_1
Maëlle Daub-Laurent – The tangibility of the invisible mind: Telling stories with your hands – Introducing a multi-disciplinary discussion into why hands matter in creative practice and beyond
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00119_1
Hilde Kramer – Illustrations for our fingertips
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00121_1
Danielle Ridolfi – Pictorial colonization: Children’s drawings at the Carlisle Indian School
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00132_7
Aggie Toppins – Fragmentary Forms: A New History of Collage, Freya Gowrley (2024)
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00131_5
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00128_2
Carolyn Shapiro – The blind spot of the blind spot: Conspiracy theory as ‘illustration’
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00129_3
Danielle Ridolfi – Reading pictures and teaching history: A conversation with D. B. Dowd
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00130_7
Vincent Larkin – DeviantArt: Data and the divided self
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00122_1
Pete Williams – Tears and rain: Part 3 – Resurrection: Phase IV
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00125_1
Selen Sarikaya Eren – Illustrating dissent: What can social movement studies learn from illustration research?
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00123_1
Paula Heister – From gods in white coats to wounded healers: Representations of doctors in picturebooks
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00120_1
Christina M. Knopf, Daniel F. Yezbick – Bombs and bombshells, aluminium and lace: Milton Caniff at the intersection of illustration and insignia in the Second World War
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00126_1
Lina Vekeman – ‘Read between the lines of Pater and look between the lines of Alastair’s figures’: Walter Pater and Alastair’s Sebastian van Storck
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00124_1
Maëlle Daub-Laurent – The tangibility of the invisible mind: Telling stories with your hands – Introducing a multi-disciplinary discussion into why hands matter in creative practice and beyond
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00119_1
Hilde Kramer – Illustrations for our fingertips
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00121_1
Danielle Ridolfi – Pictorial colonization: Children’s drawings at the Carlisle Indian School
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00132_7
Aggie Toppins – Fragmentary Forms: A New History of Collage, Freya Gowrley (2024)
DOI: 10.1386/jill_00131_5