Why isn’t everyone drawing?
We all loved drawing as kids, didn’t we?
Bonaccorsi wants to get us back to this pre-lapsarian state.
Is it a Romantic project? Is Bonaccorsi romanticizing childhood? I don’t know, but he likes the Picasso quote; “It took me a lifetime to paint like a child.”
This quote is interesting. Can you imagine a similar sentiment in any other subject? Can you imagine Einstein hoping to get back to a time before he had any understanding of basic equations? Is there any other subject where learning the subject is a hinderance to doing the subject?
I know what you’re going to say. You’re going to say; “Picasso had to learn to draw like Raphael (or whoever) before he could draw like a child.” But actually that was not what Picasso was saying, and, look at any book of 20th Century Art. Look at those dudes. Look at Robert Motherwell, Look at Cy Twombly. They’re amazing artists and they couldn’t draw for toffee.
Of course, what I mean by ‘draw’ in this context is observational, realistic drawing. Which is only one kind of drawing, but they couldn’t do it. And it wasn’t a problem for them.
Bonaccorsi says that there are two obstacles (or tyrants) that stop us being able to enjoy drawing. One tyrant is the exclusivity of the idea of realistic, observational drawing as the highest pinnacle of artistic achievement.
This isn’t an original idea, but it’s a fair point, almost universally accepted within art education.
The other tyrant is more interesting for me. Bonaccorsi suggests that learning to write demotes drawing. He says that we are all able to draw until we are made to practise letter formation At this point, drawing is considered a ‘childish’, less important activity. I’d never thought of this before. I’m still pondering it.
The point is that, for Bonaccorsi, the type of drawing he’s pushing is very emblematic. It’s not so much cartoony, more like pictograms. He’s interested in symbols, but not so much in symbolism. And this is how he differs from other people doing a similar thing. What he’s offering is quite narrow. It has a narrow focus.
I don’t mean that as a criticism, I actually think it’s what makes his approach interesting and distinctive.
You can do this kind of thing (we’re all artists, free your inner artist, etc) and focus on form (as Bauhaus did). Or you can take the Lynda Barry approach which is much more about looking hard at beginner drawings and seeing the value in them. Lynda Barry is a hero of mine so I get more from her work, but she brings in many other elements that are not just visual, so this may not be a fair comparison.
(more to follow)