Learning to Draw by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc

[Prof. Madad]

Read Learning to Draw (1881) by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc share some thoughtful comments; identify key themes and your reaction to them. Do you identify with any of the discussion or the characters? Provide any examples from your personal experience and/or observations.

[Sabrina]

More than the predominate topic of "observation", after reading the excerpt I came away with considering issues of interpretation, although in a way they really go hand in hand. In art, or in design, one observes something and then will interpret it their own way. Come to think of it - one naturally does that to most everything in life - learning about something, digesting it, and then understanding it whichever way they do. But it's the different ways we come to understand (aka interpret) these things that makes art, design, and life in general, interesting. "Learning To Draw" made me recognize, or rather remind me really, that a lot of people aren't open to interpreting, or seeing things differently. Most people, like M. Mellinot, will have a set, immobile, standard - what they think to be true, is true - and I feel art easily suffers from this mindset. I find it most enjoyable to see things from all angles, even if I don't always understand it. Naturally, greater discoveries can be made when you're in inclined to see things that aren't initially there to be seen. You may end up with a result you previously haven't even considered possible. I particularly like they way in which M. Majorin states "... you don't understand; or rather you, like many others, have seen only with the eyes of those who do not know how to see." I'd propose that it may be that they don't know how, or instead they're just not willing to do so. Monday's class, as well as having Type IV with Ali last semester, made it clear that this issue will come up time and time again; to push yourself and your work to places you wouldn't initially think to go to achieve the greatest outcome.

[Jessie Oh]

I went to work today and listened to a meeting that discussed the consistency of Barney's identity. The large group of executives clearly did not have a couple hours to spare, but why was this subject so crucial to today's consumer culture? The reading reminded me of the visual aesthetics of branding. I noticed the power of branding comes from consumers unconsciously consuming a visual before actually observing it. When one begins to observe and deconstruct, the mind takes a conscious path to see what one chooses to see. We are probably exposed to more than 4000 ads a day and for the consumer to instantly recognize a brand is a valuable tool for the designer. Yes little Jean intelligently captured the cat's movement with a few lines, but there's something to be said about Majorin and the rest recognizing it as a cat. You realize you choose to see the other two legs beyond the drawing. 

[Chris Kelsch]

This story was very interesting. Many observers will look at a piece of art hanging in a museum, lets say a Rothko or Pollock, and state that they could do that because it is just a bunch of splattered and blended paint. But what they do not realize the internal struggles of the artist that they are portraying visually. Its not what one physically sees but it is what ones creative and expressive eye sees and interprets. Art is not about rendering or drafting (if it was, it would be very boring) it is about expression and experience. In my opinion there is no 'training' talent necessarily but their is an unlocking of talent through confidence and practice. Everyone is capable of creating, but they have to see whats past the literal in order to express.

[David Saunders]

I would argue that this short story is an observation, in itself, of the educational process. I believe that education has many benefits and detriments to a developing mind. I agree with Mr. Majorin's statement that "it is necessary to have a very thorough and broad education to develop intellectual qualities" (9). I recently had a similar debate with my mother regarding the education of my two twin siblings, age 6. I attended a small, private, Quaker school in Manhattan and I accredit a large portion of my personality to my years there. The curriculum, in general, is well balanced and promotes individual interests. I mention this because my mother wanted to split up my two siblings (an idea I agreed with) to send my younger brother to St. Bernards (a school with great facilities, however a strong belief in what I believe is an antiquated curriculum) and my younger sister went to the school I had attended. While both schools have their own merits, I believe that, especially in our current culture, you must not only be allowed, but encouraged to question everything. To tie this in to the reading, I believe that observational skills are what initiate the question process. How can a society innovate and move forward if no one questions the status quo? If one does not consciously observe, one cannot question, if they cannot question, they cannot think for themselves.

[michael]

In the beginning of the story, Eugène Viollet-le-Duc encourages the
notion that the origin of interest in each of the boys to draw was
unimportant. While it may be impossible to distinguish facilities the
boys were born with, it is however worth looking at each individuals
background/upbringing as it affected their work. Jean and Andre were
each a product of their environment and upbringing. While their paths
frequently crossed, they were in no way the same.
It seems relevant that there was an abundance of inspiration in
Andre's life, and, with the exception of Andre, next to none in
Jean's. Through the influence of his father's scholarly certainty and
self-righteousness, and his mother reenforcing his father, Andre was
taught to be "right" at an early age. This coupled with frequent
exposure to art and more specifically, other artist's representations
of things, made Andre's connection to Andre weaker. His explorations
and curiosities never went unaffected or uninfluenced. In Andre's
case, to just observe and to represent his visual observations
graphically, would take an extraordinary amount of conscious maturity.
Andre would not only have to be able to put away his influences, he'd
have to know to do so in order to simply, exclusively draw what he saw
and not what he thought. This very ability, as it exists crucial in
any true artist's tool box, was the only thing Jean had.
The precious gift of observation that Jean possessed, was natural,
but not, as M. Majorin puts it, unconscious. It was rather Jeans only
consciousness. Jean's ability to so purely observation and represent
may have been accessed and express so because of a distance from
outside influence. Jeans father was a craftsman, although it seemed
the art in his craft had long since died. His mother was gentle but
detached. Jean was not engaged in school or at home. All he really had
was himself and the things he saw.
It was natural for Jean to develop what is widely thought of as an
incredibly advanced ability. However, Jeans ability to purely observe,
albeit natural, was unaffected and thus very delicate. Sending Jean to
a place were he would be "taught" to further cultivate something he
naturally possessed would prove to be challenging, even detrimental if
he were not able or willing to further access and build upon what he
knew. Regardless of whether or not anything was even learned, just
leaving said place unscathed would require introspection on a level he
would have never otherwise had to explore which could potentially
leave him confused and mentally bruised. A mind like Jean's would
require the attention of a skilled, patient and even more observant
professor, but if those stars aligned, Jean would further understand
his inherent skills and potentially harness creative sensibilities,
becoming ever more conscious of his art.

Unrelated, I'd say I identify with the cat, and/or the strawberries.

[Mathieu C.]

The key themes that stood out to me are the following: first, there is the "bourgeoisie" versus the common folk, which is given by the context for the two boys Andre; coming from a rich bourgeois family, who's father is a rich wealthy man, who experienced the bourgeois life, that has everything given or bought, who believes that he is a higher being because of his social status. Then you have Jean who has a tough father who holds three professions to makes ends meet. These two boys having two different ways of life but they are friends because of their nurse, the only reason why they know each other. The way we see how Mr. Mellinot feels superior; a more intelligent and educated man when Mr. Majorin & Mr. Mellinot have a debate on the drawing that Jean drew of the cat. That is also where we see another key theme of observation & creativity versus the "Right" way. Both Andre & Jean are arguing like what the drawing that Jean drew of the cat is no the way you a cat is because a cat has 4 paws and not 2. What I like about this theme is how Mr. Mellinot like the bourgeois that he is talks about money and going threw the proper education to draw but Mr. Majorin disagrees with him because Jean the kid that comes what at that time are considered as common folk was able to draw with purity that was not polluted by the teachings of a school of drawing a cat "the way your suppose to" with 4 paws. Mr. Majorin noticed the talent of the child by the responses when asked how he came to draw the cat the way he did. Jean demonstrated his ability to observe and communicate with purity what he saw exactly, not a cat but an instance/event that was funny and personal to him without the

"twenty thousands francs to make that child lose his natural talent - a gift that he unconsciously possesses - and if he could devote forty more to give him time to unlearn what is taught him in your schools, and to see for himself."

Unfortunately, this point of view even true as it is hard to accept in todays society, since without any degree from a school is very hard to get a job from any enterprise or profession. Although I do remember of something a consultant told me this summer. When I was interning for the firm called Symrise after working there for two weeks there only graphic designer needed to leave to Tasmania for work related trip. So a consultant came when he wasn't there, needing to keep her updated with what we were doing and getting her ready to work she told me:

 " Honestly do as many internships as possible, do the most you can which I see you are doing because when you want to get a job what they will be looking at is not so much the schools you come from or if you know to use the adobe creative suit. Its your internships and the experiences you gain from them. That is why I suffered."

 

 

[anne chiang]

"Why did you draw only two?" "Dear me, sir! I didn't notice, I didn't see the others."  After reading this story, it gave me a flash back of when I was learning to draw in 7th grade. I didn't know that I knew how to draw and I drew still lifes the way that I saw them. By the time I was a senior in highschool, I still did not know that I had a talent in art, but other's around me had seen it and so my parents then pushed for me to study art. I feel that when someone is learning how to draw, you can not tell them how to do it. There is no correct way to draw and there is no incorrect way to draw. Learning how to draw is so subjective, anyone can take it any which way they interpret it. In the story, I feel like I'd be able to identify myself as Jean... and my older sister would probably be Andre, telling me that everything that I'm doing is wrong. 

[NoraG]

I'm sure a lot of the artists at Pratt, and many art schools recall strange or particularly memorable moments like Jean and Andre did. I for one, remember how easy it was to draw at a young age, when our imaginations are at their peak performance, and our hands are therefore unconfined by doubts or limits.  An important lesson I remember learning when I did start weekend art classes was to draw what you see, not what you think when using references or models. It helped refine your ability to observe without confusion. That's what I felt the difference was between Jean and Andre, especially when M. Majorin explained it. It was one thing to know the "right" way to draw a cat, but to set aside your assumptions of how it should look and draw what you see even after perspective, size, and shape have already been altered by Jean's position and the movement of the cat. He decided not to draw the four legged stick figure that most children copy, and instead used his inner eye to remember its position.
I can relate to Jean's character, who seemed unorthodox to his counterpart and some adults. I don't think it means that Andre is or will be a bad artist, or that his father is wrong to teach him that way. I don't think it did any good to describe each child's family, since I don't think your father has to be poor and rude to be a "true artist", and having an influential, educated family means you're wrong. But M. Majorin had a point that many people who study to be artists sometimes lose the passion and raw talent they once had by replacing it with rules and tricks. It makes sense to me that people who don't get a formal education but still persue a career path need the diligence and perseverance to achieve the same results.  The only person who can say which is the right path it probably the artist herself.

[Jacob]

Two main take-aways for me were:

1. Representation is interpretation; good drawing is "lying." 

(the boy "rendered what his eyes communicated to his understanding" p9)

My response:

This is a great lesson, and something it took me a long time to accept. In terms of visual depictions, we are all learning this lesson over and over again: rendering foreshortening, seeing color change in the context of other colors, discussing impressionism/expressionism/cubism, optically aligning type, etc. These are all examples of the literal mind being wrong and the eye/instinct being correct. 

In life in general, it seems common to have to deal with the fact that appearances are often of greater consequence than reality, to the point where it might make sense to start questioning one's own understanding of reality.


2. Formal education plus natural aptitude does not guarantee fantastic results, because 

a) training and knowledge can sometimes 
undermine intuition ("unlearn what is taught to him...and see for himself" p9)  and 

b) going through the motions of completing the education process is not always enough for someone to really excel in a craft. ("seen them fail for want of prudence in their education" p10)

It seems like this part is probably why we are reading this story first. This idea gets me all pumped up to try and release all of the things I think that I know, try to question all my assumptions, and then work really hard and push myself to make work that is way better than I expected. I agree that just going to school is not a silver bullet. I have seen weeks go by where I got everything done and felt like I had nothing to show for it, and had other times where I've created things I was really proud of that were not even part of a required body of work. This is a good reminder that we all need to remember what our goals are and push ourselves to be moving our work forward rather than just running in place. 

[Jessica Mazur]

In my opinion this story shows that a child or person needs to be a
good observer to create art. The way you see something determines the
piece of art work. Jean saw the cat coming towards him so that is how
he drew the cat. However Andre was taught to draw a cat with four
legs. I think that by observing the world around you an artist work
comes out with a better outcome and point of view. I enjoyed this
story because it shows that education is not always more important or
better than observing and seeing for your self.