PDA

View Full Version : Chp 6:The Practice And Science of Drawing


Nickel
11-10-2006, 10:51 PM
VI
THE ACADEMIC AND CONVENTIONAL

Look back to chapter five for the definition of "dither."

I found this very interesting since Mike is hosting the current
MOM in our Oil Forum on Ingres.

The variations in a beautiful drawing are so subtle as often to defy detection.


The studies of Ingres are an instance of what I mean. How true and instinct with life are his lines, and how easily one might assume that they were merely accurate. But no merely accurate work would have the impelling quality these drawings possess. If the writer may venture an opinion on so great an artist, the subtle difference we are talking about was sometimes missed by even Ingres himself, when he transferred his drawings to the canvas; and the pictures have in some cases become academic and lifeless.

((Big plus here for working from life and maybe avoiding doing the cartoon???))

Without the stimulus of nature before him it was difficult to preserve the "dither" in the drawing, and the life has escaped.

This is the great difficulty of working from studies; it is so easy to lose those little points in your drawing that make for vitality of expression, in the process of copying in cold blood.

Speed compares here, old to the new artists.

The older masters, it seems, were content sincerely to try and do the best they were capable of doing. And this continual striving to do better led them almost unconsciously to new and original results.

Originality is a quality over which an artist has as little influence as over the shape and distinction of his features.

All he can do is to be sincere and try and find out the things that really move him and that he really likes. If he has a strong and original character, he will have no difficulty in this, and his work will be original in the true sense.

I like sincere. :)

Nickel
11-10-2006, 11:20 PM
Here is the link to:

Chp 7:The Practice And Science of Drawing
http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5114454#post5114454

Sam Cree
11-11-2006, 09:47 AM
Those last couple of lines really bring it all home!

I still get ticked by the modern idea that not teaching skill can produce originality. What that often produces are dry, tight, inaccurate works that illustrate an unsuccessful struggle for mastery of an idea that isn't clear to the artist in the first place. In my humble opinion, of course!

Speed has a way with words.

Nickel
11-11-2006, 01:28 PM
He sure does have a way with words,totally agree!
One of the hardest things I ever learned, you need a plan! :)

Precious Mazie
11-11-2006, 01:40 PM
“Originality is more concerned with sincerity than with peculiarity. The struggling and fretting after originality that one sees in modern art is certainly an evidence of vitality, but one is inclined to doubt whether anything really original was ever done in so forced a way. The older masters, it seems, were content sincerely to try and do the best they were capable of doing. And this continual striving to do better led them almost unconsciously to new and original results. Originality is a quality over which an artist has as little influence as over the shape and distinction of his features. All he can do is to be sincere and try and find out the things that really move him and that he really likes. If he has a strong and original character, he will have no difficulty in this, and his work will be original in the true sense”

“To sum up, academic drawing is all that can be really taught, and is as necessary to the painter as the practising of exercises is to the musician, that his powers of observation and execution may be trained. But the vital matter of art is not in all this necessary training. And this fact the student 79should always keep in mind, and be ever ready to give rein to those natural enthusiasms which, if he is an artist, he will find welling up within him. The danger is that the absorbing interest in his academic studies may take up his whole attention, to the neglect of the instinctive qualities that he should possess the possession of which alone will entitle him to be an artist.”

These two paragraphs spoke to me the strongest in this chapter. That originality can not be forced because it is an instinctive quality and that Academic drawing is a necessity to be taught but not an end in its self. I have already said something about the last paragraph so I would like to say a little about Originality. I marvel at the Originality I see often in the art of the WC artists. I wonder where does that come from and can it be learned? Looks like HS says no. If it is deep inside how can it be encouraged to come to the fore? What do you do?

azulparsnip
11-14-2006, 08:49 AM
I like what ya'll have posted here and agree wholeheartedly. I too wonder about originality and where to go for it. It seems however that this muddies the water. I have found originality stimulated two ways -

#1 by putting myself in an "uncomfortable" or unfamiliar place artistically

#2 approaching it in a "looking-glass" cake fashion - passing it around first and then cutting it. By this I mean just diving in and then stepping back to see what has surfaced, and working with that.

And yes, HS is an excellent communicator - wonder if he sat around a coffee house hashing all this out

Precious Mazie
11-15-2006, 12:02 AM
Azulparsnip (Love your name!)

I like your suggestions and for me since every area (except drawing) is uncomfortable or unfamiliar that shouldn't be too hard to find. Maybe I don't challange my self enough.

I also would love to find such a coffee house where artist could hash things out. But living were I do. On the top of a hill top in KY no such place is around here. WC is that place for me but I think it would be really great to actually speak with other artist in person!