In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

84 Books culture from social structure results in the liberation of the creative imagination and, on the other hand, an increasing irrelevance of culture to social life . . . art styles, too, are likely to become increasingly detached from “social reality,” more abstracted from the particularities of any social environment, more subjective expressions of the socially unconstrained individuality of the creator’ (p. 179). Again, ‘the tendency to counterbalance the advancing bureaucratization of public life by an increased stress on highly personalized emotion and on the intimacy structures of private life will be reflected in art in periodic waves of intense expressionism and through the infiltration of fragmentary reflections of the artist’s intimacy structures-not for their own sake. . . but as gestures toward the establishment of an individual identity’ (p. 182). These quotationsconvey the flavour ofthe authors style, which is currently approved in sociological circles. Non-initiates may find it a trifle trying, but they should make an effort to come to terms with it, especially in view of Kavolis’ prediction that ‘it must be assumed, at least for the immediate future, that art styles will increasingly reflect the cultural orientations and conditions of life of the intermediaries (critics, dealers, museum directors) rather than those of the creative artists themselves, or the public actually “consuming” their work’ (p. 206). To the list of intermediaries one may add sociologists, whose quirks should therefore be the object of some concern to artists. Analyzing Children’s Art. Rhoda Kellogg. National Press Books, Palo Alto, Calif., 1969. 308 pp., illus., $8.95. Reviewed by: Richard G. Coss* In creating a book that will enlighten the art scholar and the artist, Rhoda Kellogg has helped fill a gap in understanding children’s art. She bases her study on the vast number of examples (over one million) that she has collected and classified according to their basic elements of composition. Beginning with the types of spontaneous line that children first draw, the author has identified twenty basic scribbles ranging from single strokes to multiple roving lines to zig-zags to circular shapes. Usually children group scribbles in overlapping layers to form clustered compositions, which she classifiesasplacement patterns. After the age of two, vaguely recognizable shapes appear, which she classifies according to the number of independent diagrams present. Units of two diagrams and three diagrams are called combines and aggregates, respectively. One frequent combine isthe ‘mandala’. a Greek cross and circular diagram (cf. Figure). Children in their third year compose mandaloid patterns with multiple radiating or criss-crossing lines, which she classifies as suns and radials. These diagrams represent the most advanced stage before the child creates pictorial images. 39 Av. d’Iena Paris 16e, France. ~~~ ~ . . ~ - - . . -. ~~ * Compagnie d’Esthetique Industrielle-Raymond Lowy, A child next begins to fill up the mandaloid suns with smaller circles often arranged as eyes. These sun faces are the first step toward the making of recognizable humans. The child then proceeds with the curious mandaloid geometry by adding arms projecting laterally from the head, while the legs are represented by two downward strokes. Humans are the favorite subject ofchildren. Other subjects, such as trees and houses, are drawn beside the humans at a later period without concern for true scale relationships . Mrs. Kellogg has observed children’s drawings from many countries and concludes that children’s art is similar throughout the world. Moreover, she suggests that children rely upon the self-reinforcing aspects of their own aesthetic creations and that they are not overly concerned with true anatomical structures in the real world. Thus, the child seeks satisfying aesthetic compositions with symmetry and balance and often repeats similar images as a form ofephemeral stimulation. As a result, adults assume that children’s art is only play. The author emphasizes the point that adults make the mistake of evaluating the quality of children’s drawings by constantly comparing them with adults’ work. Sometimes parents try to rush a child prematurely into more advanced drawing stages but a child will make recognizable detail for only a short period before reverting back to its earlier practices. After the age of five they add pictorial detail in their drawings learned directly from adults. The author discusses several diagnostic...

pdf

Share