Home   >   Community   >   Nurturing art

Nurturing art

By on July 26, 2009

The ability to draw something “realistically” must seem almost magical to non-artists. Yet the skill to draw what your eyes see is very learnable. The art begins when you realize that you can choose what to see and draw. That sounds obvious, but there’s more to it than just choosing between drawing an elephant, a tree, or a person.  Even with the same or similar subject—such as scenes of adults fostering children—you can choose to focus on different aspects of that subject, and make different types of drawings based on different criteria.

Here’s a drawing by the French neo-classical artist, Ingres (Photo 1), who was born in 1780. Neo-Classical artists admired the qualities of classical Greek art, such as clarity, perfection, order and idealized beauty. This type of drawing impresses with its skillful draftsmanship and realism. Ingres’ precise lines give both fine detail and an overall impression of these family members.  We know what they looked like.

We can’t really say that about this sketch by Rembrandt (Photo 2), the Dutch artist born in 1606. We’re not sure what these people may have looked like.  If Ingres’ drawing—clear, careful, and precise—is good, does that make Rembrandt’s less than good?

The Rembrandt is sketchy, not so “realistic”—if it took him more than a minute to draw, I’d be surprised.  Compared to Ingres’ fine pencil lines, Rembrandt’s chalk lines are rough. But Rembrandt’s drawing is every bit as exact as Ingres. It’s just that Rembrandt isn’t concerned about these people’s appearance; he’s concerned about what they are doing. That commands his attention, defines his purpose, and that is what he draws so wonderfully—and accurately.  Ingres’ lines describe forms; Rembrandt’s lines describe action… two different uses of line, both determined by the artist’s intention.

How many people would guess that the Rembrandt drawing requires at least as much skill as the Ingres? If you looked at any part in isolation, such as the woman’s outstretched hand, you might not even know what it was. Yet with a few quick lines, Rembrandt tells you exactly what is happening, in attitude, gesture, and feeling. The lines are calligraphic, almost like writing… like a signature that also says something about the writer. And like a writer, Rembrandt is telling a little story.  If someone had written us a letter describing two women teaching a child how to walk, we would look through the words to visualize the event, even while we might also admire the writer’s use of words and penmanship. Rembrandt’s drawing has some of that quality—it allows us to openly view his thinking and creativity, and it invites us to be a part of that process.

So if we can appreciate both works as fine drawings, then what are we to make of Paul Klee’s (Photo 3) drawing? It’s called “Family Out for a Stroll,” but what could he possibly be choosing to observe? Klee, a Swiss-German artist born in 1879, has a very different intention. He allows his lines the freedom to explore and invent, not just copy or describe. Klee was interested in children’s art, symbolism, and music. They suggest what his art already tells us: He wasn’t so much looking out as he was looking inward. His art of imaginative exploration usually nurtures a childlike wonderment in me—that, and often a smile. They are “magically” imparted with only a few lines on a piece of paper, but that’s just the drawing. What we feel through those lines and images—whether by Ingres, Rembrandt, or Klee—that’s the art.

David Arzouman is an artist, writer, and educator.  He developed the program for ArtLOFT Ebisu School of Art.

About TF Tribe