The problem is that skill in the 'symbolic' forms of drawing does not seem
to evolve naturally into skill in representation - which is why most adults
draw like ten-year-olds, and why special training of the kind advocated by
Brookes is necessary. She believes that both kinds of drawing are important
and can develop alongside one another.
I'm sure that Katrinka is right when she says that drawing 'realistically'
is not a high priority for very young children. But it is evident that from
the age of about five - given the right training - most can do it quite
well. And when, later on, they do want to be able to draw 'what they see',
they'll be much better equipped to do so, and therefore less likely to be
frustrated and give up altogether. So training in representational drawing
needn't be tyrannical - quite the reverse, in fact.
George W.
At 02:30 PM 5/8/02 +0100, you wrote:
>I suport Katrinka's view entirely. The tyranny of representational drawing
>depresses many young children's abilitities to draw what they know as well
>as what they 'see'. This pressure, compounded by the tendency for early
>years practitioners to give feedback on the emergent literacy, rather than
>drawing, potential of their early meaning making in line, results in many
>children electing to be 'not able to draw' from an early age. They rarely
>escape from this constraint unless they meet an unusual primary school
>teacher who can teach them to draw by building on their strengths and
>helping them to overcome their (real or imagined) weaknesses.
>
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ac/ad/htmlpages/staff/gwhale.html
George Whale
Research Associate
Loughborough University School of Art & Design (LUSAD)
Loughborough
Leicestershire
LE11 3TU
UK
Tel: +44 (0)1509 228967
Mobile: 07944 751088
Fax: +44 (0)1509 228902
|