THINKING THROUGH DRAWING: PRACTICE INTO KNOWLEDGE

68 TEACHERs COLLEGE COLUmbIA UNIvERsITy

Learning to Pause

ist both (A) learns, and works within, the limits of
their perception, and (B) extends these limits by
developing their perception. Central to the argu-
ment is an enactive account of vision, entailing that
the way the body moves creates changes in percep-
tual awareness. From this view the role of the hand
is always a significant part of the perceptual equa-
tion. Only by considering the dance of eye, hand,
head and whole body can a complete picture begin
to emerge of the drawing process, of perceptual
style and transformations.

Extra-ordinary perception
Van Sommers (1984) argues, in the particu-
lar context of drawing a hand, “I do not believe
that normal perceptual commerce with objects is
adequate to this task” (132) and that while several
styles of perceptual analysis “would be adequate for
recognition... not all are equally suitable as a basis
for drawing” (132).
What is an adequate and suitable style of per-
ception for accurate drawing from life, and how
do we acquire this style? My original proposal
was to study how experienced drawers look at gaps
between objects, referred to by drawing teachers as
“negative space.”
The dominant paradigm in drawing teaching is
that students need to learn how to look at things
in order to draw them. The premise is that if you

learn to look then you can draw, implying that the

mechanical act of the hand will follow easily. There

is a bias towards isolating the eye as the sole per-

ceptual tool in the task of drawing. The common

view is that the eye perceives, and the hand fol-

lows. To a large extent experimental research has

operated on this paradigm, adopting a sequential

model with the eye looking and perceiving, and the

action of the hand following information from the

eye. My perspective, from my own teaching experi-

ence and research, is that students often struggle to

integrate and coordinate their eyes and hands, and

that being more explicit about how the hand and

eye synchronize will facilitate learning. Cognitive

scientists have begun a productive dialogue with

philosophers about skill acquisition, embodiment,

enactive vision and consciousness (see Jacob and

Jeannerod, 2003; Seeley and Kozbelt, 2008; Varela

et al., 1993; O’Regan and Noë, 2001) however this

does not, I submit, reach drawing education in any

effective way.

The first point to bear in mind is that the eye

moves a great deal during observational drawing,

making many fixations and weaving a web of con-

nections.

The movements of drawing (a style) bring about

a new style of perception. Crucially this includes

eye movements, and phases of not moving.

Segmenting and pausing distinguishes

experts from novices

Two behavioural factors distinguish experts

from novices: pausing more often, and drawing

smaller segments of lines. Tchalenko (2009) found

differences in eye movements between novice and

expert drawers when copying complex lines, and

developed a drawing hypothesis relating to how

people divide up the image into sections to be

drawn. He recorded the drawing strategies of 16

subjects, with drawing experience ranging from

novice to expert, while they copied a line drawing

of a standing woman. He found significant differ-

ences between the experts and novices:

The experts produced accurate cop-

ies whereas all the beginners produced

marked inaccuracies of overall scaling,

proportion and shape. Analysis of eye and

hand movements showed that the experts

alone segmented the original drawing into

simple line sections that were copied one

Figure 2. Still of eye tracking data imposed on video

footage, showing the web the eye weaves between

object and drawing (Brew & Fava, 2011)