Michael, I think I almost totally agree with you, where do you teach?
Rachel
On 16/6/08 08:13, "Michael Bray" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In my experience as an art student a kabillion years ago, I would
> occasionally copy works that caught my attention. It wasn't to just copy,
> but to slow myself down and try to understand how the artist composed, used
> value and line etc...but this was only useful as I was making my own works
> at the same time. I found this process instructive, but I always realized
> that the artist's whose work I was copying was not my style, but it would
> offer me something to help develop my style. Copying as an exercise in
> observation I don't find is as useful. If that is the point, drawing from
> reality is more useful I would say. In a class room setting, the greatest
> danger with a copying method, is the student will become impressed with the
> result, but may not realize all the decisions that need to be taken to make
> their own original work. That said, I believe a selective, individualized
> approach can help students become aware of issues in drawing that they may
> not be able to grasp as readily by reading or lecture.
>
> Regarding the original question of applying a learned style to original
> work, I have seen some assignments that get good results, but usually not as
> a starting point. Get students drawing what's around them, then introduce a
> style to explain the concept of interpretation from what you see to what you
> draw. Then I would suggest you move to the student's drawing their familiar
> surroundings but with an interpretive mindset (if that makes any sense). It
> does not have to follow the style they copied, but it should follow the
> process using simplification, exaggeration, pattern etc...because I feel
> that you are using the Matisse example not to have students draw like
> Matisse, but to start seeing/experiencing how the drawn image can be
> influenced by the surroundings but not necessarily having to be a realistic
> copy of reality. I think if a copy is approached more along these lines, it
> can open up the student's mind to just how fluid, playful, and expressive
> drawing can be.
>
> M
>
> On 6/16/08 10:31 AM, "Rachel Pearcey" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> I went to the recent Russian exhibition at the Royal Academy in London.
>> There were some works by Matisse and Picasso I had never seen plus of course
>> the wonderful dancers, or whatever they are called, which I had only seen in
>> reproduction. I stood and copied 3 paintings and it really helped me to
>> see/understand how they had been drawn. To copy another artist you have to
>> suspend your own practice but to apply it to your own work you need a
>> certain amount of technical expertise and confidence in your own practice.
>> You need to be able to 'see' what each line is doing and why it was placed
>> there, but also that some might be mistakes which have been left. I think
>> the whole process is very interesting but also a lot more complicated than
>> it might seem.
>> Rachel
>>
>> On 15/6/08 17:16, "Maureen Kendal" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> I always dislike this method of teaching for the reasons you note.
>>> If we are teaching people to look,
>>> Do not our eyes , hearts and minds emerge from a fresh vision and
>>> unique universe?
>>> Looking at something and seeing anew and fresh as if for the first
>>> time, in a state of emergence?
>>> Why are we asking people to copy?
>>> It is one technique to look closely at a great master etc and
>>> understand the technique and appreciate it etc
>>> but what about the joy of playing with and manipulating and
>>> experimenting with the technique, rather than only copying.
>>>
>>> I am interested in looking /listening and challenging what we see/
>>> hear - that is the excitement.
>>> Does anyone out there get excited from copying?
>>> Maybe they do, Andy Warhol and yet every image printed was different
>>> again.
>>> His duplicated images were been playing with repetition and
>>> variation, but not mere copying.
>>> A thought?
>>>
>>> Maureen Kendal
>>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2008, at 13:59, Y.A.Raw wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have an issue with the notion of asking students to paint like
>>>> famous artists.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have any tips or advice on getting students to 'apply'
>>>> the methods and techniques used by other artists, as opposed to
>>>> just copying them?
>>>>
>>>> I'm asking because I have just taught a one-day workshop on
>>>> 'Drawing like Matisse' to adult learners of varying abilities. I
>>>> just wondered what other teachers' methods might be. Explaining
>>>> Matisse's use of gesture, line, colour, pattern, mood etc. wasn't
>>>> really the problem. Getting students to apply these to their own
>>>> work was tricky. They wanted to create pictures that looked like
>>>> Matisse's, as opposed to creating their own pictures and applying
>>>> Matisse's techniques. There is a difference...
>>>>
>>>> (I appreciate that teaching/learning this in one day is a
>>>> relatively tall order...)
>>>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yvonne
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>> The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391),
>>>> an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in
>>>> Scotland (SC 038302).
|