Copying Thurstan again - easing my way back into sketching

Hi, how are you doing? Me? Well, I haven’t posted anything here since completing the text and illustrations for ‘Alice’s Adventures at the Poles’, no. That’s partly because I haven’t hardly produced anything since. You know how it is – I have to give my new day job the effort and dedication it deserves, and so a lot of the time I just haven’t had the oomph to sketch in the evenings or weekends. I do make a little money out of my art, enough to provide spendsies for my overseas sketching trips, but it’s not my living so I do have the luxury of being able to leave it for a bit when I’m not feeling it.

So up until the last week, the only sketching I’ve done at all recently was during a weekend in Oslo in January. I’ll write about that in a future post – probably. But by Friday just gone I could feel my sketching mojo coming back. But what to sketch? Ideally it would have been nice to copy one of John Tenniel’s Alice sketches – stick with what you know and what you enjoy, innit? But I’ve copied every sketch he made for Alice in the past and I don’t want to do it again. So what was the next best thing? Well, yes, I could have gone for one of the other great Alice illustrators and done another of theirs. I haven’t coped all of Mervyn Peake’s, or Ralph Steadman’s, of Charles Robinson’s etc. etc. But I wasn’t feeling it. I wanted to do a Tenniel style illustration. Which is what led me back to Edgar Thurstan.

In case you haven’t read my earlier posts on this subject I will try to summarise as best as I can. I fell under the spell of the Alice books through an edition, published by Odhams in the 1930s that my grandfather had bought. In my ignorance I had always felt that it contained some of the original Tenniel illustrations. Towards the end of last year I bought a copy of this exact same edition for pennies on ebay, and found out that the 21 illustrations within it were made by one Edgar Thurstan. But they are so clearly inspired by Tenniel’s work that I think my confusion is forgivable. For what it’s worth I think that Odhams wanted the Tenniel illustrations but didn’t want to pay the commission for them to the Tenniel estate. The rights remained with the estate until the 1960s. So I guess they set our Edgar to his work with the instruction to make them as much like the Tenniel originals without breaking copyright as he could.

I copied the Thurstan illustration of Alice in the train carriage  and compared it with my copy of Tenniel's original to prove my point a couple of months ago.

I also commented that the illustrations where Thurstan shows more originality and goes further away from the Tenniel originals are less effective in my point of view. Well, maybe that’s a little unfair. Here’s the copy I made on Friday of Alice meeting the Red Queen in Looking Glass.  Below it is my copy of the Tenniel illustration of the same scene

You’ll notice the more creamy coloured paper of the Thurstan copy. This is because I used my trusty Royal Talens book for it. Not sure why I feel this way but I always enjoy sketching in it. Now, this is similar to the Tenniel in the style – the extensive hatching and cross hatching. The use of trees in the background gives the composition a little similarity. Thurstan, though, has done what he does elsewhere by transposing the positions of the figures. In this one though his Alice is in a different pose to Tenniel’s, curtseying (it saves time). The figures of the queens are quite different too – Thurstan ignores the angularity of Tenniel’s queen, and the fulness of her face seems to owe more to Tenniel’s Duchess or Queen of Hearts. Both wear crowns which look to be inspired by the top of the Queen piece in a standard Staunton chess set. Compare the next picture I copied, also of the Red Queen, with my copy of Tenniel’s:-

Compositionally there’s more similarity between these two. The position of the hands, and the Queen’s staring eyes come to mind. Ironically Tenniel’s is now fuller faced while Thurstan’s is more angular. Yet I have to say that I really like what Thurstan did with the Queen’s arms and hands. Again, he’s made a figure that is more animated than Tenniel’s original.

Okay, so we come to one of the illustrations that I did think inferior to Tenniel’s by some degree. Here’s my copy of Tenniel’s illustration of Alice meeting the caterpillar in Wonderland above Thurstan’s.

This is an interesting one. Again, Thurstan has done his mirror image trick of reversing the positions of the figures and even some of the background details like the smaller mushrooms. The Thurstan hookah is pretty much the same as Tenniel’s. But the big difference, the huge difference, is the caterpillar. Tenniel, to be fair, doesn’t give us a lot to work with in the original. The caterpillar has its back to us and he doesn’t give us much more than the clever use of what might be the forelegs of the caterpillar to suggest the profile of Mr. Punch. So here Edgar really bites the bullet and ignores Tenniel’s caterpillar completely. His caterpillar is a hairy one. And it’s actually pretty well modelled too . . . apart from that face.

You know, I must have been quite inspired by this illustration when I was tiny because the caterpillar has always been one of my favourite characters. But the face of it . . . well, it’s just wrong I’m sorry. It’s too simple, too sketchy and cartoony. It’s out of place here, and it’s a shame because I have come to really appreciate everything else in this illustration through trying to copy it. But it’s surely a case of inspiration failing Edgar when left to his own devices.

Between making the second and third sketches yesterday I tried again to find out anything I could about Edgar ‘E.B.’ Thurstan, and once again I pretty much drew a blank. The only references I could find were for a few works he illustrated for Odhams in the 1930s and the majority of those references were to Alice. And for that matter most of the references to Alice were specifically to the Humpty Dumpty illustration in Looking Glass. So I don’t know. It’s possible, I suppose, that Edgar was not under instruction from Odhams to make his illustrations like Tenniel’s. Perhaps he was under pressure, inspiration failed him and so he decided to use Tenniel’s work as a starting point. Who knows?

Whatever the case, although I know next to nothing about Edgar, I salute him. For the most part, loving your work, sir.