The Art of Lolth

I always loved this painting in Spectrum Fantastic Art 2.

lolth.jpg
 
Madalch said:
When Lolth was drawn in the Fiend Folio, she was a spider with a woman's head (no torso).
Click to expand...
Well, Lolth predates Fiend Folio -- her first appearance was in "Descend into the Underdark" adventure series, and its sequel Queen of Demonweb Pits. And yes, she was described as a giant spider with a head of female drow. Turbine (parent company of Dungeons & Dragons Online) took the liberty of changing Lolth into spider-centaur, a.k.a. drider.

Speaking of which, I never saw a painting of a drider which actually matched the description -- "Due to the bloated form, it is impossible to distinguish the sex of a drider". The driders on page 15 and 35 of above linked module look kind of like tubby males. Every female drider image I ever saw left no doubt it was female.
 
BTW, does anyone know who did the artwork for Gary Gygax's original modules? As you can see in the link above, it was awful.
 
Mark6 said:
Well, Lolth predates Fiend Folio -- her first appearance was in "Descend into the Underdark" adventure series, and its sequel Queen of Demonweb Pits.
Click to expand...
True, but I don't remember the drawings from the modules as well as the one the FF.

Speaking of which, I never saw a painting of a drider which actually matched the description -- "Due to the bloated form, it is impossible to distinguish the sex of a drider". The driders on page 15 and 35 of above linked module look kind of like tubby males. Every female drider image I ever saw left no doubt it was female.
Click to expand...
Like any artist of the "chain-mail-bikini" school of art is going to resist the temptation to draw a pair of perky ones.
 
Madalch said:
When Lolth was drawn in the Fiend Folio, she was a spider with a woman's head (no torso).
Click to expand...

Even the 80's D&D cartoon portrayed her as such. I remember watching that and almost doing a spit take when the heroes were dropped into a trap with Lolth there. The thought of dropping a 20+ hit die monster on a bunch of 2nd or 3rd level characters was just insane. :jaw-dropp
 
Hecubas said:
Even the 80's D&D cartoon portrayed her as such. I remember watching that and almost doing a spit take when the heroes were dropped into a trap with Lolth there. The thought of dropping a 20+ hit die monster on a bunch of 2nd or 3rd level characters was just insane.
Click to expand...
If you were old enough to know how many hit dice she had, you were too old to watch the cartoon.






Not that that stopped me, but I never admitted to liking it.....
 
When I read the title of this thread I expected it to be about amuthing pictureth of catth with lispth.
 
Mark6 said:
BTW, does anyone know who did the artwork for Gary Gygax's original modules? As you can see in the link above, it was awful.
Click to expand...

The cover of Q1 was by Jim Roslof, and wasn't very good. He has other stuff that's somewhat better. Most of the art is actually by David S. LaForce and it's awful. He's much better at the maps, and should have stuck to cartography. Understand that at this point, D&D's publisher TSR was just starting out and could only afford amateurs. They got lucky finding David Trampier, Erol Otus, Darlene Pekul, and and Jeff Dee. Everyone else they had was universally awful.

Later they could get better artists, like Keith Parkinson and Jim Holloway, and then, in 2d edition Jeff Easley, Larry Elmore, and others.

The art from Q1 I do like is on pages 1, 27, and 32 by Erol Otus and pages 7, 9, 14-20, 25, and the back cover by Jeff Dee
 
Last edited:
^ ^ ^ Yes to most of what marksman said above.

The 1st edition artist who did the rather crude cover for the first Monster Manual, and much of the pen-and-ink module artwork, was David C. Sutherland III, who signed his stuff "DCS". Some of his stuff was quite good, if a bit sloppy.

My favorite early 1st ed. artists were David A. Trampier ("DAT"), Jim Roslof, Darlene Pekul, and Erol Otus. They had style and character.

When TSR revamped the 1st edition line and brought in Jeff Easley, Clyde Caldwell, Larry Elmore and Keith Parkinson, the bar was significantly raised in terms of quality and life-like representation in the artwork.

I met Easley a few years ago at the Texas Ren Fest, bought a few prints. One of the nicest guys out there and probably the single best and most gifted fantasy artist alive.

David S. LaForce ("DSL") was there too. He was nice but I didn't want to tell him I didn't like his work. :o
 
Vortigern99 said:
I met [Jeff] Easley a few years ago at the Texas Ren Fest, bought a few prints. One of the nicest guys out there and probably the single best and most gifted fantasy artist alive.
Click to expand...
rofl, WHAT? He's responsible for this abomination, so he's automatically disqualified from any kind of list that refers to him as remotely good. :P

Clyde Caldwell just apes Boris Vallejo and puts cleavage everywhere. Zzzz. Keith Parkinson is better, though. He likes the "tiny characters in a large sweeping background" theme a bit much, but at least he's not a hack.

A good fantasy artist is Michael Komarck or Ted Nasmith.
 
Last edited:
You've linked to a minor piece of his that looks like a sketch he tore off in a matter of minutes! You judge him by one image to the exclusion of a vast of body of superlative work.

In terms of photorealism, imagination, technique and the capacity to delight the eye, I stand by my stated opinion that Easley is the greatest fantasy artist working today.

I like Nasmith just fine, but haven't investigated Komarck yet. I will mention that I have a BFA and have worked as an artist and illustrator, but let's not lose sight of the fact that aesthetic judgments are subjective.
 
Actually, that was a book cover, and he has similar such atrocities in his book covers, it wasn't an individual error or anything.
 
It's a lesser work he produced for a smaller fee than what he normally charges. You get what you pay for, ya know? It looks like it was achieved with dyes rather than his usual oils, and then re-arranged by an art editor using some kind of software. Easley's full-scale pieces are very complex, vivid, textured and brilliant.

For heaven's sake, even Michelangelo (my personal favorite artist) had unpolished sketches of lesser quality than his masterworks. It doesn't make him any less of a master.
 
I have a fondness for the depravities of Erol Otus.

(The ones he drew, that is...I'm not commenting on his personal life.)
 
My favorite is Trampier (the surname, not the adjective)

okay, the adjective too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom