/lit/ - Literature

>>19262992
Start with Carlyle.

I started an experiment where I was going to learn how to draw but use Ruskin's 19th century manual and shitpost the results on /ic/, but kept running to speedbumps like "leave your ink out a little bit but not to the point where it turns gray". Modern India ink does not even do this shit and I couldn't even figure out what he was talking about via google, it's just too archaic and you get stuck trying to improvise. They don't even make the paper he wants you to use anymore. An interesting read from a historical perspective though. It is a pretty well known drawing manual but I think it's just a meme at this point, I doubt anybody has actually gotten gud via this book in like three generations or so.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/30325/30325-h/30325-h.htm

>>19263303
What about the the advice on moving your pen and stuff like that though?

what does this guy write about? robbing trains? lmao

I've actually read The Stones of Venice, in all three unabridged volumes.
The first one is the best. But it didn't sell so he made it less lyrical, and more historical.After i tried some of his Florence writing and it just wasn't the same . He got bitter is the point, everything that didin't fit is rather eccentric vision of architecture was an affront. But The Stones of Venice is really terrific, and did open up the city like nothing else did.

I should read some of his English work.

>>19263329
I had already studied drawing a little via other sources so the parts I read I pretty much already knew. Overall I would say it's outdated t.b.h., but I'd still like the see the results of somebody who actually just started with Ruskin and stuck with it. You'd probably end up drawing like an 1850s engraver, which is a kino style.

Also note that Ruskin was kind of a contrarian and he argued that perspective literally doesn't matter, but in its context (shitting on painters of his time) it makes a little more sense. Nowadays you're a retard if you don't employ perspective though.

>>19263339
Thanks for the advice, I'll probably start (from scratch) with Ruskin so if you see a post with the results it's probably me.

Wish me luck.

>>19263575
kek have fun, post your results on /ic/ after you've made a little progress. to get started with crowquills, look into comic books communities as crowquills are still used today by professional inkers in graphic novels.

Crowquills are the best shit. I've loved Brausse ones the most since they have some really flexible ones that I'm aware of.

>>19263303
>Modern India ink does not even do this shit and I couldn't even figure out what he was talking about via google
Ruskin would have been using iron gall ink, when fresh it is on the light side but oxidizes fairly quickly. Leaving your ink out, aka leaving the bottle open, just allows it to oxidize before you use it so what you see as you draw will be closer to what it will look like a week later. If you leave a bottle of it open for a bit to oxidize it tends to turn a sort of muddy grey.

India ink, old or new, does nothing but evaporate if left open, it is just lampblack (carbon) suspended in a liquid. Iron gall ink was preferred because it was much more durable and waterproof but considerably more expensive and time consuming to make. Its acidity was a problem so faded out of use in the late 19th, early 20th century when better alternatives finally started to come about.

>>19263339
>Nowadays you're a retard if you don't employ perspective though.
Look at Rembrandt etchings.
He obviously wasn’t laying things out using perspective lines, or graph squares.
The same is true of a number of artists.
Italian Renaissance artists like Raphael and Da Vinci laid stuff out with perspective lines, because it was the meme at the time.
Artists focusing on architecture also tend to do so, because perspective is part of the art and science of architecture.
You can tell which artists used perspective and who did not though, and there are plenty of great artists who didn’t bother.

You can also tell artists drawing from life verses those copying a photograph, or drawing stationary objects.

>>19263833
welp, mystery solved. thanks bro.

>>19262992
Start with his selected writings from penguin and then his autobiography, Praeteritia.

>>19262992
What's your point of interest? As an architect myself I would say "The seven lamps" is an essential read.
If you are in anyway interested by Venice, its architecture, its painting school and broader history I can only recommend you "The stones of Venice". It's an amazing work, the astonishing descriptions and the overall understanding of the transcendent intertwining of moral, economical, political and artistic spheres of the city makes it the only of its kind.

>>19262992
Seven Lamps and Stones of Venice (though I only read the abridged because I honestly can't be assed to read 3 volumes on a subject that I honestly don't enjoy that much) are really great. Please don't read his political work which is enough to put one to sleep permanently. He also should have died sooner because he was 100% wrong when it came to Whistler, who honestly was not even that radical but of course was quite a departure from muh Turner. I do want to read his autobiography someday because I quite enjoy like his stately writing style but never got around to it

>>19267030
I am interested in him as one of the "sage writers" of the 19th century, along with Carlyle whom I am currently reading and Arnold whom I intend to read after Ruskin. While not particularly passionate about architecture, I recognize the importance of it and aesthetics broadly to men's souls which I understand Ruskin being influential upon his century's ideas of.
>>19267061
Unto This Last was praised by Carlyle so I will have to trust his recommendation over yours.

>>19267141
>Unto This Last was praised by Carlyle so I will have to trust his recommendation over yours.
Okay man, but as much as I respect Carlyle it's at least obvious to me that Ruskin was a bit naive when it came to political commentary. I suppose it's admirable in a sense that he tried to extend himself beyond just art criticism and history to improve society, but it gives me the same feeling of when like a poet tries to enter politics but fails spectacularly like the whole debacle of when Victor Hugo wanting to stand for parliament: your talents are obviously more useful elsewhere

>>19263336
Read Modern Painters next, anon
If I were OP I'd hunt old Oxford Pockets or pre-1960's Everyman Library editions of his work