I find that the more Arnheim I read, the more I like him. At first I found him very difficult, but I guess it just took a while for me to get into his writing. I liked the simplicity of the begining of his chapter on form - it is so fascinating to think about parts of vision I do not normally pay attention to at all. He simply says, 'the difference in appearance between a teacup and a knife indicates which object is suited to containing a liquid and which to cutting a cake' (96). When you look at a teacup, you can mentally break it down into its shapes if you try to - the circular rim, the curve of the handle, the hollowed center. But what a person sees when they look at a teacup is a kind of shape; it is seen in the context of other whole objects, and not as a assemblage of parts.
My favorite part of the chapter was towards the end - the drawings of humans on page 143 made by elementary school age children. Arnheim says, 'Certianly these children were not trying to be original, and yet the attempt to put down on paper what he sees makes each of them sicover a new visual formula for the old subject" (142) It is so interesting to think, this is the way that they see the human form - and who is to say whether or not it has 'imagination' to it, they certainly do have originality and an individual take/perspective on human bodies.
Arnheim defines artistic imagination as 'the finding of new form for old content, or ... as a fresh conception of an old subject' (142). According to that definition it would be impossible for childre to do imaginative drawings, solely because of the fact that they have not learned/seen any other types of artworks and therefore cannot compare it to what they are doing. I don't know if I can articulate this very well, or if it even make makes much sense, but here we go. If a young child looks a a human, and draws them in a new and unique way, is that not a type of artistic imagination? Arnheim does talk about how surprised he is at many different ways of representing the children come up with, in fact he is impressed with 'the abundant resources of pictoral imagination that are found in the average child until lack of encouragement, unsuitable teaching, and an uncongenial environment suppresses them in all but a fortunate few' (144). I guess I am just arguing semantics in his use of 'artistic imagination'. There is an immense amount of individuality in the drawings, and they are quite different from real life (dare I ask, could this not be the 'old'?)
I also was, in addition to the post down below mine, interested in the discussion of schizophrenic artists. I have studied Nijinsky for another class, but never had the opportunity to look at his art after he stopped dancing (and was in an out of sanatoriums). I would really like to see some of the drawings/paintings he did, but can't seem to find any online right now. I would be very intersted to see how and if they connect/contrast with his previous drawings and designs for his choreography or costume designs. Anyone who has any luck with this, let me know please! Ill post anything if I find it
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
" Arnheim defines artistic imagination as 'the finding of new form for old content, or ... as a fresh conception of an old subject' (142). "
ReplyDeleteI think that Arnheim's definition of artistic imagination is apt. With regard to children's artistic imagination, Vygotsky comes to mind. A reconstruction of his text by Francine Smoulcha organized four of the major features of creative imagination one of which was "imagination becoming a higher mental function and as such a consciously directed thought process." When children begin to draw they first spend most of their time feeling the materials out - this movement makes this mark, that motion makes that mark. From this stage they manipulate this movement and that motion to make this and that mark and spend time working out comfortability with the marks. Around the time this takes place, children have had experience with their environment and recognize shapes within it. In a way, a child's conception of a head takes new form in the circle on the page. This correlations develop between circle and head, for example, which becomes the next schema to practice. It is at this step that Vygotsky seems to apply because as a child represents a human in his basic shapes, he is consciously directing a process to organize a figure - thus giving new form to old content.