what you actually observed. In this act of communication a simplified conceptual symbol is what got communicated to your audience, and I would
suggest even to yourself. You have ignored or reinterpreted what you saw and instead drawn something more in line with your mental construct. The construct
superseded the reality for you. You can argue that our artist just can't draw, but he did draw well enough to convey the concept of a chair with an oval
object on it very clearly. I would argue that it is more a perceptual misdirection that is present in all human minds than a lack of artistic ability. Hold
final judgement and bear with me for a few minutes."
He brought up the next image. "Let's look at this drawing. It shows a chair from the three-quarter view. It shows the slats in the back of the chair, and
you can see the watermelon or oval shape sitting on the seat. Some of the top of the seat is shown as well. It also shows four legs. This seems to show the
reality of what is seen more than the concept of a chair. It also took more time to produce. There is still something odd about it when you look at it
though, isn't there? What is it that is off?"
The class assessed the drawing, and a couple of people called out "The legs look off."
"Exactly, while there are four legs drawn, they are drawn as being the same length. If you look at the original image of the chair, you will notice that
because of perspective, the legs actually look shorter at the back of the chair. Again though, the artist knows conceptually that the chair legs are the
same length, so rather than draw what she saw, she communicated the concept instead. Once again, while to a lesser extent, a mental construct of a chair is
communicated instead of what is actually observed."
He moved on to the other two drawings. "When you see these drawings, they look more like the photo of the chair and watermelon. The back slats are there.
All four of the legs are drawn with the appropriate legs shorter. The drawings show what you actually see when looking at the picture. This drawing here
even has some shading to show how the light falls on the chair and watermelon. So the more you keep your efforts free of pre-existing mental constructs or
summaries, the closer what you see and communicate are to reality."
"This substitution of pre-existing mental constructs is easy to see in artwork. This is especially true in untrained artists. Think of how most kids of
about age five or six paint a picture. There is usually a blue strip at the top of the page for the sky, a green strip at the bottom of the page for the
grass and the people and other objects placed haphazardly between the two. What they paint is the mental construct. They know the sky is up above. They
know the grass is down below, and they know everything else is between the two. They can look anywhere around them and see that the sky meets the ground at
the horizon, but what they draw is altered by what they already know. The sky is above, and is put at the top of the page. The ground is below, and is put
at the bottom of the page. It is a great example of pre-existing mental constructs taking precedence over reality."
"The same is true when beginning artists draw faces. They invariably draw the eyes too close to the top of the head because they know the eyes are at the
top of the face. In reality, if you actually look, they are clearly half-way between the top of the head and the chin."
"That there is more being demonstrated than just the person's artistic ability was shown in an experiment. One group of people was asked to draw a person
as seen in a photograph. A second group drew the same photograph, but with it turned upside down. What was found was that the drawings made from the
upside-down photo were much more accurate representations. Simply changing the orientation of the picture forced them to deviate from their mental
constructs. They concentrated more on drawing the individual
suggest even to yourself. You have ignored or reinterpreted what you saw and instead drawn something more in line with your mental construct. The construct
superseded the reality for you. You can argue that our artist just can't draw, but he did draw well enough to convey the concept of a chair with an oval
object on it very clearly. I would argue that it is more a perceptual misdirection that is present in all human minds than a lack of artistic ability. Hold
final judgement and bear with me for a few minutes."
He brought up the next image. "Let's look at this drawing. It shows a chair from the three-quarter view. It shows the slats in the back of the chair, and
you can see the watermelon or oval shape sitting on the seat. Some of the top of the seat is shown as well. It also shows four legs. This seems to show the
reality of what is seen more than the concept of a chair. It also took more time to produce. There is still something odd about it when you look at it
though, isn't there? What is it that is off?"
The class assessed the drawing, and a couple of people called out "The legs look off."
"Exactly, while there are four legs drawn, they are drawn as being the same length. If you look at the original image of the chair, you will notice that
because of perspective, the legs actually look shorter at the back of the chair. Again though, the artist knows conceptually that the chair legs are the
same length, so rather than draw what she saw, she communicated the concept instead. Once again, while to a lesser extent, a mental construct of a chair is
communicated instead of what is actually observed."
He moved on to the other two drawings. "When you see these drawings, they look more like the photo of the chair and watermelon. The back slats are there.
All four of the legs are drawn with the appropriate legs shorter. The drawings show what you actually see when looking at the picture. This drawing here
even has some shading to show how the light falls on the chair and watermelon. So the more you keep your efforts free of pre-existing mental constructs or
summaries, the closer what you see and communicate are to reality."
"This substitution of pre-existing mental constructs is easy to see in artwork. This is especially true in untrained artists. Think of how most kids of
about age five or six paint a picture. There is usually a blue strip at the top of the page for the sky, a green strip at the bottom of the page for the
grass and the people and other objects placed haphazardly between the two. What they paint is the mental construct. They know the sky is up above. They
know the grass is down below, and they know everything else is between the two. They can look anywhere around them and see that the sky meets the ground at
the horizon, but what they draw is altered by what they already know. The sky is above, and is put at the top of the page. The ground is below, and is put
at the bottom of the page. It is a great example of pre-existing mental constructs taking precedence over reality."
"The same is true when beginning artists draw faces. They invariably draw the eyes too close to the top of the head because they know the eyes are at the
top of the face. In reality, if you actually look, they are clearly half-way between the top of the head and the chin."
"That there is more being demonstrated than just the person's artistic ability was shown in an experiment. One group of people was asked to draw a person
as seen in a photograph. A second group drew the same photograph, but with it turned upside down. What was found was that the drawings made from the
upside-down photo were much more accurate representations. Simply changing the orientation of the picture forced them to deviate from their mental
constructs. They concentrated more on drawing the individual
Similar Books
