The Ely miner., 1906-03-09

is more complex and the variety OF
the possible combinations greater.
The oranges on the shelf with the
bowl was an obvious arrangement
There was not much else to do but
place the bowl on the shelf and sur
round it by oranges. Here the ar.
rangement does not suggest itself at
once. There may be SO many ways of
seeing the trees and fence. This is
what makes this subject, while as easy
to draw as the other, several steps
more advanced. 1t will be found un-
til the last forms given in figure
drawing that the actual difficulties of
drawing will be only slightly in
creased, while the application of the
forms will greatly increase in difficulty
and interest.
One of the drawings in group / has
the lines accented to show the near
relation of the forms to the objects
symbolized, and that it may be used
among the children who have freer
feeling for drawing.
It is possible that by this time the
teacher finds criticism of the chill
dren's work fuller of perplexities than
any other part of the drawing lesson.
For his aid another set of children's
work Is reproduced (see group p and
the line of comment given, more sug-
gestive than exhaustive. The selec-
tions shown are representative of both
good and bad work.
Criticism of Glass Work.
No. 1 has not the space of its picture
we'll filled. The fence and trees are
too low down, giving look of timidi.
ty. Suggest the more fearless way in
which Nos. and 6 have filled their
pictures. This timidity of expression
may be inherent in the character of
the child and it is useless to combat
it, but bolder expression can be en-
couraged. The measured placing of
the trees suggests a lack of imagina.
ton and fear of experimenting.
No. is too set in its arrangement,
with one tree in the center and the
other four in the corners. This is
lack of imagination without the ex-
treme timidity of No. 1.
No. shows lack Of sense Of the
relative size of trees and stones,
whereby the idea to be conveyed by
the symbols is lost. The plane in
which they are placed destroys the
sense of their natural existence as
conveyed by No. s. No. can profit
by this comparison.
No. 4 has trees and fence also drawn
in the air. making the picture unreal.
1t is not without some feeling for
proportion, and one can see in No. 5
a successful attempt at similar ar.
rangement. Time must be allowed for
tie correction of the picture vision of
such cases as Nos. 8 and a. After
they have initiated Nos. and they
Later an observation of nature will
be of more benefit.
Nos. 5, 6, and are quite worthy
to serve as models, Nos. and for
their big proportions given in a fear
less way and the ingenuity in the use
VI the Ieuce III NO. anu Iue cieVer-
ness of using the loose stones at the
foot of the tree in No. to give the
plane of the ground.
Nos. and 8, while no less agreeable
in proportion, have not the boldness
of Nos. and 6. No. s shows much
nicely of arrangement in the trees.
No. has taken the liberty to curve
and accent the lines of the forms un-
til they express more than the
mechanical circles would. The privi-
lege of doing this, as already stated, is
permissible if not abused.
The subject following the orchard
might be the willows and spring and
fence, as shown in group 8. The ma
terial is the same as in the previous sub
ject, except for the curving Of the
tree trunks. This subject may have
good contrast in the farmhouse. road
and trees seen in group 4. In this most
of the lines are straight. The difficulty
lies in keeping all things on the same
ground plane as spoken of in the criti"
cism of No. 8 above. Two combinations
are given to aid in this direction and
g = Il 4nrz M