Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Cartoonists Exchange Correspondence Course: Lesson Correction Portfolio 1946

The Cartoonists Exchange of Pleasant Hill, OH used to be a busy cartoon correspondence course operation for a number of decades. "Learning how to cartoon by mail" was a real thing in the 20th century, with several schools all over the country. Famously, Charles Schulz and others paid for these kind of courses. Today we are looking at the Lesson Correction Portfolio and it is copyright 1946 by Cartoonists' [sic] Exchange.




Cartoonist David Rand collected students' submissions, and then, sold the drawings back to them. You just have to shake your head and admire Mr. Rand's monetization of the medium!






So many of these corrections are serious drawing comments:
  • indicate grain in wood,
  • upper torso should be longer,
  • nose on pretty girl's face should be less noticeable,
  • hand detail should be more carefully worked out,
  • glorify the girl's legs.

Okay, maybe not that last one.




Lots of good, basic advice here, 73+ years on. I love pages like this, with lots of pen noodling. Even if you've gone all digital, then this still applies!







Evidently, a student was given a lesson. I don't own the lesson books, so I'm in the dark here. Maybe something like the old lady commits violence against the old man. Something like that. Or, guy finds jar of mystery spirits in the cellar; hilarity commences.





There is some good advice here, but I find that instead of looking at the folds in the clothes, I am wincing at the story telling.



Below is a photo of Mr. Rand, realizing his ambition of drawing comic strip ads for some consumer item called "Peppets."

 
 Edited from an original blog entry of March 18, 2009.

1 comment:

oldtaku said...

This stuff is gold.

'I find that instead of looking at the folds in the clothes, I am wincing at the story telling.'

I've noticed that with the old gag comics they don't believe at all in 'show, don't tell.' Rather they show you and they tell you, ad nauseum. I don't know if this is just carried over from editorial cartoons, that they were just uncomfortable without lots of text, or they just didn't trust readers yet to be able to comprehend what they were seeing - maybe because of bad printing.

But it's particularly bad in that one.