SPURIOUS OR AUTHENTIC?
PRODUCT ORIENTED OR CHILD- CENTERED?
TEACHER DESIGNED FORMULA OR PERSONAL EXPRESSION?  
THESE ARE CRITICALLY  IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

In the Drawing Network, emphasis is on spontaneous line drawing as a language medium. This is a natural extension of the broader phenomenon referred to as "child art". Or put it another way: drawing-as-language is nested within the broader practice of authentic art education. To return to the title, authentic, child-centered and personal expression are characteristics that give power to drawing-as-language.

There is a totally antithetical approach which we refer to as "spurious art".  Spurious, product oriented, and teacher designed formula are appropriate descriptors because unlike child art, this category is devoid of language significance. Indeed, spurious art compromises the language values that accrue from spontaneous drawing - intellectual development, mental health, mental healing, empathy, bonding with caring adults and values associated with creativity and imagination.

And yet, while authentic drawing-as-language is still relatively rare in the home/school curriculum, spurious art abounds. We view this as a tragic misunderstanding with serious long term consequences for individuals and cultures. The Drawing Network hidden agenda is to retire spurious art practice from the home/school curriculum through the promotion of authentic drawing-as-language.

We would prefer not to take a critical stand against practices that are sincerely meant and are assumed to be beneficial by well-meaning parents and teachers and yet the optimum schooling of children requires it. We urge those who see value in what we call ‘spurious art practice’ to compare the values inherent in these competing and incompatible approaches. If you still think there is a place for teacher designed formula art and the rest, we urge you to give authentic drawing a ‘thirty day trial period’ as described in our pamphlet, "Thirty Days of Drawing", which you will find on this website. To make clear what we mean by spurious art practice here are examples:

* TAKING A LINE FOR A WALK" : This innocent sounding exercise in  "making an abstract" is meant to stand here for all formula art. This one goes back to the pedagogy of Paul Klee who used it with adult students at the Bauhaus. Here is an outline:  locate a point on the paper with your drawing tool; make a line pattern by letting it meander across the surface encouraging frequent cross-overs. When the paper is filled with loop-the-loop shapes  each one is colored-in to make an overall abstract pattern. A flock of designs will appear, each one different, but all distressingly the same.

Critique: It is a basic principle of art making that there must be form and there must be content; either one alone is not enough. Form without content is mere decoration; content without form is mere illustration; form and content together create the condition of aesthetic energy and art. The practice of art is the practice of language. ("Decoration" and 'illustration" are okay but they’re not what authentic child art is about.)

"Taking a line for a walk" is all form and no content! When children draw with empathy for content, the result is a drawing with strong formal elements. See our analysis of form and content of Zion’s "Boat Holiday", Joanne’s "Lucy was tired now ...", Brendan’s "Santa" and other drawings  which appear on this website.

It is curious but true that when children are taught to imitate the processes of modern art,  the result is sterile and without language value, but when the approach to subject matter is authentic and empathic, many of the values of modern art are a natural outcome - expressiveness, good design, ‘significant form’, visual music and so on. (Again, see our analysis of various drawings.)

It is fashionable to link art practice to the "elements and principles of design" the rationale being that children thereby learn the "grammar of art".  The reference  to language (grammar) is confusing. True language is a marriage of form and content although they can be separated after the fact for analysis. It is sad to reflect that children who have an intuitive understanding of language when they draw must be held back by academic notions of grammar which do far more harm than good. "Taking a line for a walk" is an example.

The authentic art of children is rich in abstract form but it appears only when there is an emphasis on content. We view the "elements and principles of design", when they are treated casually and informally and as part of talking about a finished drawing, as a way of building a vocabulary, a methodology for appreciation and pictorial analysis but only if children are motivated to make art as a spontaneous response to content, theme and subject matter.

* HAND-SHAPED ANGELS: An article in a recent journal demonstrates how children can make ‘angels’ by tracing a line around their splayed fingers and adding a  head by tracing a penny.

Critique: Formulas  for making "cute" images give children a false notion of art as a powerful language medium. Authentic art is never ‘cute’ and only authentic art generates the gifts of language referred to above. Do children enjoy them? Undoubtedly some do, but I submit only when there has been a lack of authentic art experience in the child’s life. Gresham’s Law states that bad currency drives out good currency and this principle applies to spurious art and ‘hand-shaped angels’: spurious art drives out authentic art!

* HOLIDAY DECORATIONS: It would be possible to fill every scheduled art period with decorations for the next public holiday. The window decorations that appear on homes and schools suggest a file of seasonal stereotypes: turkey shapes for Thanksgiving, snowman shapes for Christmas, bunny shapes for Easter and so on. Using stereotypes instead of the child’s imagination is a sadly missed opportunity.

Critique: Seasonal stereotypes result in spurious art but the calendar of celebrations is a gift for  creative teachers who want their children to practice authentic art. Start by motivating thematic drawings based on the stories of each celebration as it appears on the horizon. (See the analysis of Brendan’s "Santa".) Classroom, school, and home decoration are opportunities for authentic art practice. Let’s have a symbolic bonfire of seasonal stereotypes and set children free with ballpoints and brushes, scissors and colored paper, charcoal and paint to invent their own decorations.  

* DIRECTED DRAWING: Perhaps the saddest manifestation of spurious art is this outmoded, but apparently persistent activity in contemporary schools. It was practiced when I was a child in the ‘thirties’ when teachers knew very little about child art, creativity theory, or emergent language. I remember drawing a daffodil line-by-line as my much loved teacher demonstrated line-by-line on the blackboard. There was no educational value then nor is there now.

Critique:  ‘Directed drawing’ is included on this list simply because it remains a subject for teacher workshops and a feature of some kindergarten/primary classrooms. I have made my points. We must each  decide as parents and teachers between offering children authentic art practice or spurious art practice. There is no way around it: one enriches the language experience of children;  the other stands in the way of that enrichment.  

Bob Steele, Associate Professor (Emeritus UBC)