MetaChat REGISTER   ||   LOGIN   ||   IMAGES ARE OFF   ||   RECENT COMMENTS




artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene

Home

About

Search

Archives

Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye

Emcee

IRC Channels

IRC FAQ


 RSS


Comment Feed:

RSS

01 June 2005

I know this is mean, but I can't help it. First place award for Best Portraiture by Home-Schooled Children with Parents Who Claim Questionable Artistic Provenance goes to...

These People!
Huh. They all draw in the same awful, finger-smudging way!
posted by interrobang 02 June | 00:19
I don't get it. Even the youngest (10 yrs old) can draw better than me.
Why should I be laughing at this?
posted by seanyboy 02 June | 01:53
They were each taught to draw in the exact same way, and it's a shitty way to draw. Isn't that enough?

You too can learn how to draw; it isn't a magical power. These kids are all learning to draw as though there is only one way to draw. It's obviously completely methodical, and devoid of any self-expression or independent thinking.

It's a terrible way to learn how to draw: take this headshot and replicate it.
posted by interrobang 02 June | 02:09
"It's obviously completely methodical, and devoid of any self-expression or independent thinking."

You're assuming that's a bad thing. There's an honest difference of opinion in arts pedagogy in general as to what should come first, technique or creativity (or if they should come together). Also, you're assuming that creativity is more important than technique and that it can essentially be taught (or midwifed, or whatever). I think I'm inclined to agree with all these assumptions but I don't take them so much for granted that I'm intolerant.

Using writing as an example, I think I'd first require great volumes of writing; what would mostly be very undisciplined writing. At the point at which the student has a "voice"—that is, when they have some intuitive understanding of and facility with the whole point of the thing—then I'd switch to rigorous technique. Like many others, I think the initial and long focus on uncreative technique is often more than stifling...it's destructive. But I think it's necessary and should be taught and required at the earliest appropiate opportunity.
posted by kmellis 02 June | 02:41
kmellis, you're getting me wrong. Obviously, you've had no previous discussion with me about this--I thoroughly believe that people should learn how to draw "classically" before jumping into abstraction--but all four of these kids draw in exactly the same way: they grab headshots or pictures out of magazines and draw them in the same manner.

Of course, children need to be taught certain things about drawing: proportion, light versus dark, and so on. But these kids seem to be being taught that there is only *one* way to draw things, and they're not deviating from it.
posted by interrobang 02 June | 03:06
Ah. Thanks for the clarification. Please pardon my misunderstanding.
posted by kmellis 02 June | 03:18
Using writing as an example, I think I'd first require great volumes of writing

You don't say?
posted by trondant 02 June | 10:38
I'm taking all these kids to the dance.
posted by drezdn 02 June | 11:12
Man, those were bad. I know they're only kids, but jeez, wait until you actually have a worthwhile product before you try to market it.
posted by Orange Swan 02 June | 11:37
And yeah, it's creepy that those portraits were so similar. My mother and I once took a sketch class together. Even though we sat side by side and drew the same things, our work looked very different.
posted by Orange Swan 02 June | 11:38
I just thought the pictures were funny.
posted by mudpuppie 02 June | 12:43
This is my first post here. || Purty.

HOME  ||   REGISTER  ||   LOGIN