Hi Leo!

The business of encouraging educators and society to value young children's
marks and drawing is a problem - since what they draw seldom 'looks like'
realistic copies objects. We celebrate this spontaneity - which Gardner
refers to as 'the unschooled mind' (i.e not ruined by adults telling
children how to draw something)!

Adults generally seem to value most drawings by older children that they
judge as 'fair' representations, just as much surely, as many adults dismiss
many 'isms' of contemporary art? Drawings by very young children are
dismissed as 'scribbles'  - using the term 'scribbles' as a highly
derogatory sense!).

The camera may be able to produce a very realistic (and with digital images
and computer technology - subsequently, distorted images) - but it seems to
me that a widely held public view remains that drawings that are as
'realistic' a copy of the object depicted = 'good'art!
Maulfry


----- Original Message -----
From: "Duff, Leo" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: Are all visual rerspesentations 'art'?




________________________________

From: The UK drawing research network mailing list on behalf of Maulfry
Worthington
Sent: Sun 06/02/2005 13:40
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Are all visual rerspesentations 'art'?



Dear Drawing Research members,

I am currently looking at the relationship between ways in which society and
education categorises childrens marks and drawing (e.g., 'art', science,
mathematics, music, writing). Since young children do not percieve drawing
in terms of 'subjects' we believe the un-natural boundaries between such
categories as 'art', and visual representation in other areas of their
thinking present false dichotomies. Such boundaries surely were more fluid
in the Renaissance? Last year I attended the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition
and was particularly struck by the gallery with drawings by non- artisits -
by surgeons, scientists, choreographers, architects, musicians and so on.

My questions at the moment are:

* 'Is all visual representation drawing - and if it is, is it also 'art'?

 I CONSIDER ALL VISUAL REPRESENTATION  TO BE DRAWING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY
ART. DIAGRAMS, INSTRUCTIONS, PLANS, IDEAS AND EXPERIMENTS NOT BEING 'ART'

* If visual representations can be viewed as belonging to both art and to
other disciplines, then surely this implies a need for educators and society
to value the whole range of marks and drawing young children make, whether
for 'art' or not?

AGREE TOTALLY

* What criteria should we use to define the drawing process - and also to
define an individual drawing - as 'creative'?

HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT ONE LONGER! BASIC THOUGHT IS THAT IF ITS PART OF A
DEVELOPMENT, ITS A PROCESS AND THEREFORE CREATIVE



 BEST WISHES LEO DUFF

Maulfry


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.