ArtPlantae Today

Libby, thank you very much for participating in this interview and for allowing us to contact each contributing artist. This book event promises to be a very exciting and very educational opportunity.

I would like to take a moment to introduce readers and new subscribers to Today’s Botanical Artists. If you haven’t had a chance to read the review of this book, allow me to get you up-to-speed. Today’s Botanical Artists was published by Schiffer Books earlier this year. It is the first book to focus exclusively on botanical artists and botanical illustrators in North America. This collection contains 220 drawings and paintings completed by 65 exceptional artists. A list of contributing artists and links to their websites (or to websites featuring their work) can be viewed here.

Let’s start with a question I had not planned on asking. I caught my own differentiation in the introduction above. This question is often asked by people who are new to botanical art. What is the difference between botanical art and botanical illustration?

Well, that is the big question in this genre, isn’t it! In my mind, illustration is created to “illustrate” – text, an exhibit, posters, etc. It illuminates text and other verbiage in a way that makes words more fully realized. It gives a perfect visual for the perfect word. Illustration is an art form, as powerful as fine art, in particular since it is generally a significant collaboration with another creator. Illustration might be limited in expressive form by the job it has to do. Illustration must be accurate as to the science of the specimen to be considered botanical illustration.

I tend to think of art as that which is created from the artist’s own inner driver, not working within someone else’s confines – not needing to illuminate words. It can be more refined, innovative and personal than illustration, but that’s not always true. Fine art, in the botanical world, also needs to meet the demands of science as to anatomy, scale, and completeness of information of a given subject/species, but presentation and choices about media, focus, vignetting, composition etc. are the artist’s alone.

And, I want to make it very clear, “art” is not a higher calling than “illustration”. Both have respected, valuable niches.

Whose idea was it to create a collection of work by North American artists?
Cora Marcus, co –author, loves botanical art! She had worked on another project with Schiffer as her publisher (a wonderful book about fruit label art of the Great Northwest in conjunction with a Portland, OR, museum), and having become a member of the ASBA, she knew what she liked! She asked Schiffer if they’d be interested in a book about botanical art. She showed them some samples of the genre, and they said yes please!

It took her about 5 years to find someone who knew the artists of the genre, and could put together a work that made a definitive statement about the artworks and genre. She asked me if I’d like to co-author with her about 3 years ago. It took a bit for me to say yes, but then I decided that if there was a publisher that wanted to publish a book on botanical art, then it should be done. As editor of the ASBA newsletter, a botanical artist and a person who has looked around the world at great botanical art for the last 10 years, I felt I could bring a lot to the project. Originally we were going to go “around the world.” However, I felt that a book about North American artists would bring a new twist to the project. I feel our artists have a “look” – a willingness to push the envelope – that is not always found in botanical art from more traditional settings. So, I found the artists, Cora wrote the words, and I laid out and designed the book. It’s been an amazing honor and challenge to get this together.

With so many wonderful artists from which to choose, how did you narrow down the list?

Well, it helped that we focused on North America! I then spent about 300 hours finding works of botanical art from living botanical artists – not just living, but actively producing art in the last 5 years. I found about 200 artists that I felt fit the bill. I then winnowed using a series of criteria: Did the art meet general botanical art/illustration guidelines – science first, aesthetics only when science was satisfied. Each artist had to have a provenance of significant art exhibits, art awards, publications and commissions. That narrowed the field to about 85 artists. Because there really are no books on this subject featuring modern artists, except for catalogs, it was a bit of a slog to find these wonderful people. And of course, since publishing the book, I run into really great artists daily that I wish I had found sooner.

What was required of artists who participated in this book?

Each artist was invited to submit up to 10 slides of their best artwork. They completed a brief artist’s statement, a listing of exhibits/publications/commissions/awards. They submitted a handling fee of $40, so that I could send their materials (proofs, slides, publicity pieces, etc) back to them once the book was in stores.

Cora and I, a botanical/scientific artist, and an aficionado of the genre reviewed the slides and selected those images we felt were best for the book. The only changes made in that final image list were due to layout needs when I designed each artist’s two-page spread. Artists were notified which images had been chosen, and were required to sign a copyright release for this book and publicity for the book, send me their best materials for effective reproduction, and proof prints if they had them.

When someone goes to a botanical art exhibit, they see very traditional botanical art. They see white backgrounds, watercolor paintings of plants placed in the center of the page, a few colored pencil paintings and even fewer graphite illustrations. It’s pretty predictable. What I truly love about the collection of artwork in Today’s Botanical Artists is the inclusion of not only various media, but the inclusion of habitat scenes, plant life cycles with a lot of imagery, plants and their insects, paintings featuring plants & maps, backgrounds that are any color but white, colored borders, and digital paintings. Are these types of pieces included in this collection because you requested them or is their inclusion an artifact of the artwork submitted by contributing artists?

Yes! Both are true. I asked them for their very best work. I told them we were pushing the envelope. And they sent us amazing bugs, backgrounds, compositions and techniques. It’s exactly this variety and verve and vision that marks North American botanical art.

What about the media featured in this book? Was a conscious decision made to bring attention to botanical artwork completed in, what I will call, “non-traditional” media such as digital collage, acrylic, and pastel?

I don’t have a mindset that says one medium is more worthy or traditional than another, even though I know the genre generally favors watercolor. Coming from a graphic design/illustration background as I do, I find any medium that gets the job done is a good medium. So, no, I didn’t make a conscious decision to include the variety that is featured, but I’m sure my unconscious bent is to pretty much ignore the medium if the result meets the goals of botanical art/illustration – illumination of the species, recruitment of the viewer to understand and love plants, and scientific accuracy.

Creating in computer or digital collage can be extremely effective, but is, I have to admit, as far as I pushed the concept! Since all of the digital compositions were featured in major American museums, I felt we truly needed to honor that contribution. I feel the same way about “photorealism” or “super realism,” as it can entirely meet the goals of botanical art/illustration even if it employs some interesting compositional effects (lens blur, depth of field loss of focus, etc.).

What message are you trying to relay to readers of Today’s Botanical Artists? Since both artists and non-artists will view this collection, let me break it down a bit more. Is your message to botanical artists and illustrators different than your message to a member of the general public? If so, how is it different?

Well, the art sends the message that plants are really, really, really important. That is a critical message in this day and age. Every bio we got from an artist said, in short, “Gosh, I love plants and I love painting them and it’s SO important for people to be more ecologically aware.” Cora found a way to say that often and in many different ways when she wrote the majority of the artist’s statements included. It’s difficult to say that over and over again and not be boring or repetitive, and she found a way. So the primary message to the public is “Save them now – plants are in trouble. Look at how beautiful and inspiring they are to artists. We hope their inspiration moves you to bigger and better involvement in the ecological needs of the planet.”

I think our message to the artists is, very simply, what you do matters – to art and to the world. Hang in there, keep on creating. This genre is a legitimate and important art movement that serves us all. Thank you, and please, keep painting.

Will there be a sequel? How about several sequels such as books dedicated to specific North American ecosystems?

Yow! Yes, I hope we have sequels. The next book, in a few years, will include artists world-wide. As to ecosystems – what a great idea! I think we need you on “staff”, Tania. I am so delighted at the reception this book is getting. I do need a breather, to paint and meet some personal artistic goals. Then, more than likely, it’s back to the book beat. The rewards far outweigh the challenges, and again, it’s such a privilege to be involved in this project and hopefully more like it. Working with artists is amazing. So much creativity and generosity in this group. What a treasure.

Thank you, Libby, for your time and for visiting with us today.