There are many inherent differences and similarities between the artwork of David Call’s, however I found that Call has to be to be very influenced by Deafhood period. Using different stylistic, and artsy techniques yet still adhering to a rather flattened result and a focus on figures, David Call made this specific mark in the transitional time shifting to Deafhood theme.

Call’s artworks is one of the powerful “alter pieces” dedicated to the lad who invented Deafhood. The same word that has been heavily influenced Call to find the golden age of Deaf stories. His artworks are considered to be one of the greatest graphic representations of Deafhood in any neither form nor shape. His artworks are heavily discussed with an ingenious, transitional “bridge” from a flatter style of art to more full-bodied, richly textured Deaf art. Pointing out Call’s tendencies toward Deafhood thinking, I would like to use one of my favorite quotes of all time, “A blind man in a dark room is looking for a black cat which is not there”-Lord Byron. Call saw the deep thinking in those stories that needs to be seen through Deaf art.

His artworks I would like to put away that he wanted to have those stories to be thoughtful and rejoicing in the gift of the Deafhood stories. His artworks are most noticeable in his ability to realistically render the human form; Call utilized a flat style typical of the Deafhood era, and Call demonstrated a higher knowledge of form and dimension.

The next point of comparison worth discussion is the nature of the composition; how the arrangement of figures and objects, and graphic sense of space were utilized comparatively by Call. For example, Submission has a series of three levels, which, due to flatness of the sense of space, appear to be like bookshelves on which rest miniature scenes. The center of the composition of his artworks in Submission whom looms magnificently over the tiny figures and is flanked by hovering audists, and the light of Deaf Metamorphosis also draws the viewer’s eye to the center of the painting, where the Deaf Metamorphosis holds one hand up in a powerful gesture, and in the other cradles, presumably, Deafhood somewhere in there.

It is very obvious that Call planned this dramatic, horizontal composition beforehand, and probably mapped exactly where to put all of the smaller figures in the composition in relation to the all-important central figure. While all of these artworks he created an image that is strong in dimensionality, there is still plenty of intrigue to be found within his artworks, such as the mystical overlapping wing design to the upper left of Deaf Metamorphosis and the multiple scenes to the right and left of Submission which depict various interactions.

Call had a clear idea of relationships of objects, perspective, some foreshortening techniques, the value scale, and dimension of Deaf space. The faces, bodies, and limbs of the two figures I mentioned above reveal detailed shading and correcting anatomy, and also suggest a real study of Deaf people for the principle of Call’s artworks and it seems to work visually on his own respective levels, Call’s version seem to be more simplified with minimal figures, and more captivating with its use of delicate shading, and perceptive sense of Deaf space. There was probably many factors contributing to these differences between his artworks, some of which might been influence of mentors and apprenticeships on and by the artist themselves, and the concept of an ever-increasing faculty for the sciences, mathematics, and visual perception. One thing can be said that David Call, his work had a profound influence on much of Deaf art that came after them. Keep up the good work!

Please visit David Call’s website: http://www.eyehandstudio.com

-JT

Copyright © Jason Tozier

This text may be freely copied in its entirely only, including this copyright message.