Drawing Movements
John L. Waters
Use down arrow or vertical scroll bar
to view whole page!
Drawing Movements
John L. Waters
February 1, 2001
Copyright 2001 by John L. Waters. All Rights
Reserved
-------------------------------------------------------
On pages 303 to 305 of his book, "Behavior Mechanisms
In Monkeys," the well-known research scientist
Heinrich Kluver illustrates and describes lines
produced by one female Cebus monkey. The monkey
produced these lines by scraping a nail, a wire, a
stick, or a piece of chalk against the floor or
against some flat surface laid on the floor. Kluver
noted that the left hand was used as often as the
right hand and that the monkey didn't try to imitate
drawings the scientist presented. Dr. Kluver also
noted that the monkey produced these "drawings"
especially when she had difficulty in finding the
solution to a problem. Kluver called these "drawings"
the result of "movement tendencies."(page 304)
Rhoda Kellogg studied many thousands of young
children's drawings. In her book, "Analyzing
Children's Art" she notes that before they try to
depict physical objects, letters, or numerals,
preschool children go through a stage of drawing
without trying to depict any visible object. They
draw lines, crosses, circles, and other simple
abstract shapes.(pages 14-18) One is tempted to
invoke the rule "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny and
suggest that the body-mind of the very young child is
passing through the developmental stage which a Cebus
monkey never leaves. However one also can ask the
question whether these drawing movements were of any
help to this monkey in responding to the difficult
problems posed by Dr. Kluver. The implication would
then be that human beings stumped by a difficult
problem might be helped by producing a similar kind of
"art" by accessing the body-mind intelligence which
remains buried and inaccessible except to the very
young children today.
Older siblings, peers, parents and teachers poke fun
of a child's art if the images don't closely resemble
a numeral, a letter, or some physical object present
in the environment. This has the effect of
intimidating and discouraging the child who can't draw
accurately and neatly from a model in the way people
expect a drawing to be done. However the kind of
drawing we are considering in this article is the kind
of drawing Heinrich Kluver's Cebus monkey was doing,
and that is drawing which isn't intended to resemble
any numeral, letter, or physical object. Today in
most homes and schools this kind of drawing is
ridiculed. And it doesn't help to call that kind of
art just a lot of silly "monkey business."
Presumably the "drawing" movements of Kluver's Cebus
monkey served some purpose, even though the monkey
couldn't "know" and explain the purpose to Dr. Kluver.
The scientists noted that this monkey often produced
these "drawings" under the stress of being unable to
solve a difficult problem. However the Doctor
considered this monkey to be the most intelligent
monkey he studied. So one would be tempted to
conclude that these "movement-tendencies" were
indicative of higher monkey intelligence and higher
problem-solving skills, at least in the Cebus monkey.
A question that might occur to us is whether
encouraging children to enjoy producing drawings which
do not resemble anything visible would be of any help
to them in solving difficult problems and/or helping
them to overcome a mental block or a learning
disability. We get a hint from Albert Einstein, who
in his writings described a feeling he had in his
bones and muscles when he was working out ideas which
later proved fruitful. His body seemed to know in
advance which ideas were good ones. This suggests
that the human body has a subconscious body-mind
intelligence which is of use to both a monkey and a
human being who is good at solving hard problems.
Children are expected to produce meaningful sounds
with their mouths and produce meaningful marks with
drawing tools. A child who persists in uttering
meaningless sounds or making drawings which mean
nothing to other people is likely to be ridiculed by
other children. Albert Einstein himself was known to
speak, draw, and write certain things which had little
or no meaning to other people. And it took young
Einstein a long time to get his thoughts in good
enough order to impress other people. One wonders
what the connection is between meaningless drawing
movements and higher problem-solving ability. Or one
wonders if there is any connection.
If there is a connection between what Dr. Kluver calls
"movement-tendencies" not intended to produce
recognizable images and please other people in other
ways, this makes sense because we know that the
original thinker often says, does, or writes things
which aren't calculated to please or impress people.
However, a child who doesn't or can't draw well and
learn to write well with a neat handwriting may have
some other process working which disturbs the process
which enables a child to be a neat and tidy
representational artist. After all, this is what
enables a child to do well in drawing what is visible
to other people. But the "art" demonstrated by
Kluver's Cebus monkey is not the kind of "art" which
children use to draw the letters and write in a neat
handwriting. Nor is it the kind of "art" which
children use to draw or paint a realistic-looking
face, apple, or automobile. Perhaps the young
Einstein just had more of a "monkey brain" than most
modern children have.
Saying this more precisely, the suggestion is that
Albert Einstein had a more "kinesthetic" brain, or
more access to the unconscious, intuitive, preverbal
body-mind so that he used his skeleto-muscular body
more in cogitating than most persons do. His work
wasn't so much illustrating what is visible to the
eye, but what is totally beyond the eye's capacity to
see. And this same characteristic is true of other
so-called "geniuses." The "genius" works on a problem
which is far beyond the capacity of people who are
mainly attentive to what is directly visible and
tangible.
My main point, though, is suggesting that young
children can be encouraged to develop their
kinesthetic intelligence and integrate this
intelligence with other intelligences as these are
developing during the preschool and the elementary
school years. This development would be encouraged by
encouraging children to let their bodies express what
they sense and feel even if it isn't tangible and
visible to the eyes. This is inner sense, inner
feeling, and inner intelligence. My idea is that by
developing this capacity to tap into this inner
kinesthetic intelligence, a child can develop a
greater problem-solving capacity than otherwise, and
be a more healthy, happy, and whole person.
References:
Kellogg, Rhoda "Analyzing Children's Art" National
Press Books, Palo Alto, California 1970
Kluver, Heinrich. "Behavior Mechanisms In Monkeys" The
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois 1933
9:46PM Monday, January 29, 2001
7:20PM Wednesday, January 31, 2001
John L. Waters
johnlwaters@yahoo.com
The information on this page represents that of John Waters and not
necessarily that of Humboldt State University. John Waters takes full
responsibility for the information presented.
This page is maintained by: John Waters