I like drawing. For a while, I thought that I wanted to be an illustrator, because I thought that would be a job that would allow me to draw a lot.
However, it seems that the more and more that I learn about (contemporary) illustrating, and the more illustrating classes that I take, the more I seem to find that "advanced" or highly "technically proficient" drawing isn't necessarily relevant to the illustration field.
A lot of my teachers talk about how they're really bad at drawing. The artists that we look at in class create graphically and compositionally strong works, but I can think of very few that utilize styles that contain a high levels of technical proficiency in drawing. Using found imagery, simplified vectors, or very naiive styled drawings seems to to be the most popular styles.
I like their work a lot, but it also makes me feel conflicted. I know that following their example and placing less emphasis on drawing would allow me to produce higher quality, more quickly generated, and more visually appealing illustrations-- however, the only reason I wanted to illustrate in the first place was so I could draw. I like the idea of being someone who can make cool, streamlined illustrations in a short period of time, and I like these works, but I don't admire them the way I admire more drawing/skill oriented pieces, and I don't find them as interesting or engaging while I'm creating them.
But they're usually objectively better in spite of this.
Can anyone relate to this or offer any opinions? I'm not trying to be dramatic when I say this, but I feel like the "smart" thing to do is to lose this attachment to drawing. But why bother illustrating at all if I throw out why I wanted to do it in the process? I'm not really sure how to think about all this and I'm wondering if you peeps had any opinions on the matter. Thanks