November 12, 2019

Is it better to be a chameleon or a peacock?

There are two types of illustrators: Chameleons and Peacocks.

A chameleon is not instantly recognisable by their work alone. They are regularly playing with mediums, styles, and materials. Trying on new looks. They adapt, whole-heartedly, to the text or environment that they’re given. Their range varies widely. Ann James and Bruce Whatley are good examples of chameleons.

A peacock, on the other hand, stands out. They are instantly recognisable through their work, no matter what subject matter or context in which they’re working. They often work in consistent mediums, styles, or materials. People say they ‘have a look’. Quentin Blake, Anna Walker, Oliver Jeffers are all excellent examples of peacocks.

But, just like peacocks and chameleons in the natural environment, neither one is better or worse than the other. One’s strength is another’s weakness, and that’s OK. In a world that rewards extroverts and ego, it’s easy to aspire to be a peacock. To have a ‘style’, an easily recognised ‘brand’. And a brand is easily confused with a ‘voice’. But it’s possible to have a long, flourishing career as either one. And it’s also possible to begin a career as one and become the other.

When it comes to art-making, what’s most important isn’t whether you’re developing yourself as a peacock or chameleon. What matters is that you’re making work you’re proud of, and making it often.

Other observations
April 21, 2026

Keeping warm

Why is it more difficult to make creative work when I’ve rested all day? Shouldn’t the energy I’ve saved through rest be fuel to maximise creative output?

April 14, 2026

Feeding off in-person energy

If something feeds the soul and something else drains it, why is it so difficult to prioiritise the thing that’s good for us?

April 7, 2026

Permission to be done

How do we know when something is done and what’s the value of calling something done even if we’re not happy with how it turned out?

View all