copying and invention as sources of form in art

National Art Education Association

Copying and Invention as Sources of Form in ArtAuthor(s): Jo Alice LeedsSource: Art Education, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Mar., 1984), pp. 41-44+46Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192809 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 13:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.127.150 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 13:03:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192809?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


art educators, has never been so crucial. Art education deals with visual literacy by emphasizing the use of visual language and elements, developing visual perception and thinking, and using visual images in personal expression. Most art educators, however, do not refer to visual literacy but to aesthetic literacy. Aesthetic literacy deals with the ART image rather than all visual images as noted in this quote from Smith (1982), "not all visual images are works of art or even aesthetic images" (p. 18).

If this analysis is correct, it is not only elitist, but unfortunate as well. It would seem that art educators may be forgetting that the visual images our students are bombarded with day after day, and the images the students themselves create, are not always aesthetic.

The role of the art teacher must go beyond the art room. If, in fact, our students are now learning more visually than verbally, input is needed in developing curricula and educational materials that are relevant and meet the demands of our students as members of this third wave society.

Art teachers should serve as con- sultants in the development of new educational materials including com- puter software, video tapes and discs, CAI learning packages, and texts. Their expertise as teachers of the visual should be utilized in development of new pro- grams of instruction. More important- ly, if the need for this change is not soon realized by administrators, supervisors,

art educators, has never been so crucial. Art education deals with visual literacy by emphasizing the use of visual language and elements, developing visual perception and thinking, and using visual images in personal expression. Most art educators, however, do not refer to visual literacy but to aesthetic literacy. Aesthetic literacy deals with the ART image rather than all visual images as noted in this quote from Smith (1982), "not all visual images are works of art or even aesthetic images" (p. 18).

If this analysis is correct, it is not only elitist, but unfortunate as well. It would seem that art educators may be forgetting that the visual images our students are bombarded with day after day, and the images the students themselves create, are not always aesthetic.

The role of the art teacher must go beyond the art room. If, in fact, our students are now learning more visually than verbally, input is needed in developing curricula and educational materials that are relevant and meet the demands of our students as members of this third wave society.

Art teachers should serve as con- sultants in the development of new educational materials including com- puter software, video tapes and discs, CAI learning packages, and texts. Their expertise as teachers of the visual should be utilized in development of new pro- grams of instruction. More important- ly, if the need for this change is not soon realized by administrators, supervisors,

role in education and take care not to lose sight of the development of their students' and their own visual literacy while pursuing aesthetic literacy. i

role in education and take care not to lose sight of the development of their students' and their own visual literacy while pursuing aesthetic literacy. i

Deborah Greh is a secondary art teacher at Union Catholic Regional High School, Scotch Plains, New Jersey.

Deborah Greh is a secondary art teacher at Union Catholic Regional High School, Scotch Plains, New Jersey.

and boards of education, art teachers should recognize this need and organize their efforts so the necessary revisions are made.

Our technological and visual society is creating new demands. There is a need for development of visual skills; teaching both teachers and students to read and use visuals is necessary if education is to meet the needs of today's society. Perhaps at some point in the future, educators will understand that visual learning and visual images have become so fully integrated into the curriculum that we will no longer need to be concerned about visual literacy. However, in a society rapidly becoming based on technology and visual communication, consideration of the development of any skill or literacy must not lose sight of what education is most concerned with: integration of the self and education of the self as a member of society. Art educators must become sensitive to their

and boards of education, art teachers should recognize this need and organize their efforts so the necessary revisions are made.

Our technological and visual society is creating new demands. There is a need for development of visual skills; teaching both teachers and students to read and use visuals is necessary if education is to meet the needs of today's society. Perhaps at some point in the future, educators will understand that visual learning and visual images have become so fully integrated into the curriculum that we will no longer need to be concerned about visual literacy. However, in a society rapidly becoming based on technology and visual communication, consideration of the development of any skill or literacy must not lose sight of what education is most concerned with: integration of the self and education of the self as a member of society. Art educators must become sensitive to their

References

Arnheim, R. Visual thinking. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969.

Arnheim, R. Perceiving, thinking, forming. Art Education, 1983, 36, 9-11.

Berger, J. Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books, 1972.

Coleman, A.D. Along with the three R's- photography. New York Times, November 21, 1971.

Dondis, D. A primer of visual literacy. Cam- bridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1973.

Katz, S. The still camera and the resulting photograph: its history, its rationale, and its developing role in education. 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 172 756)

Krunik, J. The eyes have it. The Star Leger, April 29, 1983.

Roberts, J. Teaching image study: an in- troduction. Visual Education, 1977, August/September, pp. 21-24.

Toffler, A. The third wave. New York: Ban- tam Books, 1980.

White, M.A., (Note 1) Personal Com- munication, March 2, 1983.

References

Arnheim, R. Visual thinking. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969.

Arnheim, R. Perceiving, thinking, forming. Art Education, 1983, 36, 9-11.

Berger, J. Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books, 1972.

Coleman, A.D. Along with the three R's- photography. New York Times, November 21, 1971.

Dondis, D. A primer of visual literacy. Cam- bridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1973.

Katz, S. The still camera and the resulting photograph: its history, its rationale, and its developing role in education. 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 172 756)

Krunik, J. The eyes have it. The Star Leger, April 29, 1983.

Roberts, J. Teaching image study: an in- troduction. Visual Education, 1977, August/September, pp. 21-24.

Toffler, A. The third wave. New York: Ban- tam Books, 1980.

White, M.A., (Note 1) Personal Com- munication, March 2, 1983.

Copying and Invention

as Sources of Form in Art

Copying and Invention

as Sources of Form in Art

Jo Alice Leeds Jo Alice Leeds

"Never let a child copy anything." Viktor Lowenfeld

orm in art may be said to derive from three sources; from the patterns and mean- ings of other art, from the art-

ist's experience of nature and the world. and from sources within the psyche of

"Never let a child copy anything." Viktor Lowenfeld

orm in art may be said to derive from three sources; from the patterns and mean- ings of other art, from the art-

ist's experience of nature and the world. and from sources within the psyche of

the producer. The term "psyche" will be used here to mean "The mind func- tioning as the center of thought, feeling and behavior." as defined in the American Heritage Dictionary (1969, p. 569). All art is in some manner a synthesis of these sources, but one or another of the sources may dominate configuration in any given form of art. For example, the artists of ancient Egypt derived their forms from the former art of their culture, all of which was conceived within a framework of

the producer. The term "psyche" will be used here to mean "The mind func- tioning as the center of thought, feeling and behavior." as defined in the American Heritage Dictionary (1969, p. 569). All art is in some manner a synthesis of these sources, but one or another of the sources may dominate configuration in any given form of art. For example, the artists of ancient Egypt derived their forms from the former art of their culture, all of which was conceived within a framework of

exacting, socially defined rules. This art expressed the group psyche of a self-contained culture much more than that of any one practitioner of art. Nevertheless, differences can be seen between the sensitivity and skill with which each artist handled these given forms, and close observation of natural detail is a hallmark of the Egyptian style.

Jan Vermeer and John Constable, on the other hand, worked directly from the forms of the natural world as

exacting, socially defined rules. This art expressed the group psyche of a self-contained culture much more than that of any one practitioner of art. Nevertheless, differences can be seen between the sensitivity and skill with which each artist handled these given forms, and close observation of natural detail is a hallmark of the Egyptian style.

Jan Vermeer and John Constable, on the other hand, worked directly from the forms of the natural world as

Art Education March 1984 Art Education March 1984

I I

! I_ _ ! I_ _

41 41



recorded by human eyesight, and truth to the reality of these forms was their intent. Yet we all know a Constable and a Vermeer when we see one, so in- delibly is the stamp of a personal response to the forms woven into the visual realism of their works. The Abstract Expressionist, in contrast, worked as nearly as possible from psychic sources of form. Yet even nondescriptive form inventions must derive, in some sense, from previously seen forms, as DeKooning's "Woman" series seemed to remind us by the manner in which the figures appear to materialize out of the nonobjective ground of the composition.

In traditional cultures the given patterns and meaning of art have been so embedded in the collective consciousness that they represent the very paradigm through which nature and the world are experienced, and serve to unify a peo- ple's history/mythology/religion with the daily happenings of life. It is the functional unity of the sources of art in traditional cultures that gives them their authentic power as human design. As Arnheim reminds us, "The uncor- rupted art work of children or of so- called primitives is never in bad taste." (1971, p. 8).

"Bad taste," or weak, ineffective art form, is not the result of any specific source of form, but comes about when the sources become confused and fail to achieve a meaningful unification under the powers of the artist. The power to unify form sources resides in the individual psyche and may or may not have to do with the age, technical skill, or cultural conditioning of the artist.

The art forms of preschool children have been much discussed in the field of art education and are still open to a variety of interpretations. They appear to stem from naturally unfolding response patterns within the child's own being, and are basically the same for small children everywhere, just as the patterns of early language learning are the same. According to Kellogg (1969), the most important source of these forms is the child's spontaneous response to the very marks he has delightedly discovered within his power to create. Kellogg terms this a purely aesthetic response. In any case, the thought-feeling-response patterns of little children have not developed to a complexity that admits of disunity,

"It Is not the source of form itself that produces what we

may call the 'copywork attitude;' t is the artist's Inability

to assimilate the material at a deep

level of unified understanding."

and from this fact stems the spontaneous power of early childhood art. The twentieth century fascination with primitive and early childhood art ac- cords with our need to rediscover those principles of unity which are the key to power in artistic form.

To learn from the study of previous art has been a necessary part of the training of practitioners in all cultures. This is a simple truism. In cultures where pattern and meaning take un- questioned traditional form, these given and copied forms are the source material for artists. This does not mean that invention and personal style are not valued in traditional cultures, only that invention becomes a subtle skill, practiced within the bounds of the given forms, and personal style is understood to be a slowly and carefully developed attribute, used to enhance and deepen rather than to alter the integrity of the inherited forms which are the artist's subject matter.

To question the appropriateness of copying as a means of learning, or as a means of new art formation itself, could only come about after the Renaissance, when the invention of new means of measurement and the ability to navigate unexplored space through their use revolutionized man's relationship to space and to its contents, in art as well as in life. Both the old attitudes toward traditional copying as a source of form, and the new problems being posed by proliferating artistic source material are reflected in Cennino Cennini's advice to young artists in Italy about the year 1437. He wrote:

take pains and pleasure in constantly copying the best things which you can find done by the hand of great masters. And if you are in a place where many good masters have been, so much the better for you. But I give you this advice: take care to select the best one every time, and the one who has the greatest reputa- tion. And, as you go on from day to day, it will be against nature if you do not get some grasp of his style and of his spirit. For if you undertake to copy after one master today and after another one tomorrow, you will not acquire the style of either one or the other, and you will in- evitably, through enthusiasm, become capricious, because each style will be distracting your mind. You will try to work in this man's way today, and in the other's tomorrow, and so you will not get either of them right. If you follow the course of one man through constant practice, your in- telligence would have to be crude indeed for you not to get some nourishment from it. Then you will find, if nature has granted you any imagination at all, that you will eventually acquire a style individual to yourself, and it cannot help being good; because your hand and your mind, being always accustomed to gather flowers, would ill know how to pluck thorns. (Cen- nini, 1960, p. 15)

Cennini showed a keen insight into the problem of artistic integrity in a complex society. The end goal of the artist is to acquire "a style individual to yourself," but it must be carefully nurtured. Too confusing a variety of source material could block the growth of a unified individuality. Cennini went on to advise:

the most perfect steersman that you can have, and the best helm, lie in the trium- phal gateway of copying from nature. And this outdoes all other models; and always rely on this with a stout heart, especially as you begin to gain some judgement in draftsmanship. (Cennini, 1960, p. 15)

A personal investigation of the response to nature, then, is to be equally the artist's teacher as copying from a master. But Cennini would not have put it in this manner. He uses the term "copying from" in the case of both models: art and nature.

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, academies of art began to be

Art Education March 1984

I

42



organized in the larger cities of Europe. The transfer of art training from the workshop to the academy was a gradual one. The academy was understood to be a place where drawing and aesthetic theory were to be taught. Practical matters such as materials preparation and use were left, as always, to the instruction of the workshop master.

From the early informal academies established for art study in the sixteenth century, until well into the nineteenth, when state sponsored academies dominated the art scene in every capital of Europe, the basic curriculum and teaching methods of these institutions remained the same. In se- quence, the student was first set to copying from the drawings of his teachers and from engraved copies of the works of old masters. These exer- cises were followed by a protracted period of drawing from casts of anti- que sculpture. Only when an accep- table proficiency was reached in these skills was the student allowed to enter the life class to draw from the posed model. Regular lectures on anatomy, geometry, and perspective augmented the student's theoretical education. (Pevsner, 1978). All drawing, however, was not confined to these methods. Both students and professionals drew constantly from nature and from the scenes of social life around them. This quick on-the-spot sketching practice was valued as a training for the hand and eye, as well as a means of collecting source material for more finished compositions (Boime, 1971).

The students of the academies learned not only drawing, but painting technique as well by copying from the old masters, and students'were ex- pected to apply both imagination and analytic skill to this task. After a careful study of the work to be copied, the student attempted its exact re- creation, from the original drawing and underpainting to the build-up finish of the final surface work. In a kind of sympathetic identification with the former artist's vision and thought process, the student was to deepen and broaden his own powers of invention, as well as to sharpen his skills in producing finished effects (Boime, 1971).

Although the academies stressed highly finished technique in copywork as they did in original painting, all teachers did not adhere to this practice,

and many encouraged their students to concentrate on more quickly sketched studies of the masters, aimed at captur- ing the spirit and structure of the work rather than its finished details. Much controversy existed in academic circles over this question: whether finished copies exactly reproducing the original were a sounder learning practice than the quickly sketched copies, which naturally embodied a more personal in- terpretation on the part of the copier.

Sir Joshua Reynolds, first president of the English Royal Academy which was founded in 1769, came down squarely on the side of the sketched studies as against the more finished copies. He said:

I consider general copying as a delusive kind of industry; the Student satisfies himself with the appearance of doing something; he falls into the dangerous habit of imitating without selecting, and of laboring without any determinate object; as it requires no effort of the mind, he sleeps over his work; and those powers of invention and composition which ought particularly to be called out, and put in action, lie torpid, and lose their energy for want of exercise.

How incapable those are of producing any thing of their own, who have spent much of their time in making finished copies, is well known to all who are con- versant with our art.

... However, as the practice of copying is not entirely to be excluded, since the mechanical practice of painting is learned in some measure by it, let those choice parts only be selected which have recom- mended the work to notice. If its ex- cellence consists in its general effect, it would be proper to make slight sketches of the machinery and general management of the picture ... Instead of copying the touches of those great masters, copy only their conceptions ... Labor to invent on their general principles and way of thinking. Possess yourself of their spirit. (Reynolds, 1966, pp. 32-34)

During the eighteenth century the idea of invention in art assumed a new importance, but was confined largely to the idea of invention in composition, and not applied to subject matter or painting techniques, which were still governed by the rules of academic aesthetic theory. The two generative

University Prints

A VISUAL ARCHIVE of 7400 basic art history subjects, prehistoric to contempo- rary, available as 51/2 x 8 inch prints, 54 each in Black and White, 104 in Color. Complete Catalog, 246-pages, $2.00. Sample prints and listings, 254.

21 EAST ST., WINCHESTER, MASS. 01890


PYRAmlD a catalog filled with a wide selection

of brand name art supplies Write for your FREE CATALOG!

PYRAMID ARTISTS' MATERIALS P.O. BOX 877/Urbana, IL.

. 61801-0877

slY IIPI--- - -. I r-

r?sae.rsnsasiiaarnw,ea?r?s;8;i 411Lll-?-?1 -

43



forces that allowed transference of the idea of invention to subject matter and painting technique in the nineteenth century were the linked ideas of freedom in many domains generated by the French Revolution, and the emerging aesthetic theories of Roman- ticism. For the Romantics, originality was not the province of genius alone, but a possible attribute of every human being. According to Boime, "the Romantic tenet enjoining the artist to remain faithful to his instincts arose directly out of the democratic sense of originality" (1971, p. 178).

The direct, open-air painting techniques of the Impressionists were developed in the environment of this aesthetic theory. Boime (1971) suggests that Impressionism sprang, in part, from the long held practice of drawing quickly and directly from nature as a way of collecting visual notes for use in more finished works. Artists had always been aware of the loss of spon- taneity and individuality that took place in the transformation of these direct sketches to their more laborious- ly finished compositions. The Impres- sionist painters developed this direct, spontaneous sketching technique into fully conceived paintings, and then had the originality, (then seen as audacity) to hang them as serious works of art!

The Impressionist and Post- Impressionist movements effectively destroyed the idea that art need be governed by any one set of aesthetic rules. Once set free from the con- straints of the academic model, in a world of growing cultural complexity, the artist has had to rely more and more on an inner, original (in the sense of the first, authentic) response to his own personal experience as the source of form.

Paul Cezanne and Vincent van Gogh, both men who lived lives of personal isolation, and whose art skills (i.e., technical procedures) were unac- ceptable by the academic standards of their day, set a model for the new attitude. They forged their responses to nature into deeply processed visions unrelated to any previous style of art. They literally invented new ways of seeing for themselves and for society.

The German Expressionists worked even more directly from emotion and inner vision, further distorting the given forms of nature and the former forms of art. Picasso drew from a wide

variety of source material, and transformed all of it through a power- fully consistent form of distortion into "Picassos."

By the mid-twentieth century, artists had not only to deal with the art of all former times and cultures of history, now available to everyone in picture books, but with the ever proliferating forms of new art movements, attempt- ing, it would seem, to be as different from each other as possible. The artists of our century have been literally over- whelmed by a confusion of form sources so diverse as to defy meaningful assimilation. The new tradition has become "The Tradition of the New" (Rosenberg, 1959), a game in which invention itself can assume a kind of mindless, "copywork" attitude.

The Abstract Expressionist movement responded to this twentieth century dilemma by relinquishing figurative subject matter altogether in favor of content-free form. The artists set out to invent (very much in the manner of the preschool child, but on a level of sophistication which made the task much more difficult) new form in response to their own previously invented form. The movement produced another revolution in our way of seeing, but the messianic predictions of its major devotees, that figurative subject matter would forever by barred from the province of "serious" art, was a short-lived hope.

The passion of the Abstract Expres- sionists against the distortions of the "life of forms" caused by forcing it into figurative shapes (Focillon, 1948), stemmed from the same source as Lowenfeld's passion against ever allowing a child to copy anything. They are both a passion to protect the psyche against fragmentation and disunity in the face of an imagery input too meaningless to digest. In both cases, the integrity of artistic unity became identified with the integrity of personal psychic unity.

To Lowenfeld, the child's art was identical with the child's self, and the integrity of both configurations would always be put in jeopardy by the inclu- sion of extrinsic forms (i.e., by allowing the child to copy the work of others). Lowenfeld began the first chapter of the first edition of his book Creative and Mental Growth (1947) by recounting two case studies of children whose mental health, in his view, had

been damaged by adult rejection of their natural form of art expression, causing the child in one case to stop drawing altogether, ard in the other case to resort to copying his older sister's art work.

In both cases, the children became unhappy and disturbed, .one suspects, for reasons beyond that of interference with their natural art expression. But for Lowenfeld art expression was the living metaphor for the self, and using that metaphor as a therapeutic tool, he recounts the manner in which he, after considerable work with these children, helped return them to confidence in their natural mode of art expression, and thereby to a renewed confidence in themselves.

One does not doubt that Lowenfeld worked such transformations with in- dividuals through art development. But one suspects, having heard so much about his personal charisma, that the loving attention he gave the children was as important an element in their healing as was their return to a personal mode of drawing. This does not mean to imply, however, that the one means would have sufficed without the other. For Lowenfeld, this unity between meaningful personal content and authentic means in art expression, at whatever stage natural to the individual, was always the key to healthy personal growth. His passionate belief in this principle as the central and proper theme of art education was unequivocal. Concerning the case of one of the children mentioned above, he said:

What can we learn from this case? We see that through the efforts this boy made to compensate for his feelings of inferiori- ty, he grew more and more fixed on a kind of representation that was not the expression of his own experiences. This fixation on strange expressions finally stopped the whole mental development of the child! Therefore, never prefer one child's creative work over that of another! Never give the work of one child as an example to another! Never let a child copy anything! (1947, pp, 3-4)

It was Lowenfeld's understanding that children who were allowed the expression of their own personal meaning in art, and who had this work accepted and appreciated by adults, could be nurtured in a state of psychic unity


I- I ,

- I --

44



from the start. It is his legacy to us that the process of artistic creation in children be honored as a sacred metaphor for the self. The power of this vision is with us still; we cannot shake it, nor have we found another that will serve as well, precisely because he worked directly in answer to the root problem of the twentieth century artist: the problem of how to maintain a productive psychic, and therefore artistic, unity in accord with meaningful personal experience.

An artist's ability to process source material at a deep thought-feeling level, and to forge it into some form of unified vitality, is what makes the dif- ference to the quality of his product. Reynolds put his finger on the problem when he described the copier as one who works "with no effort of the mind," and who thereby suffers lack of energy and want of invention in his work. Yet as much shallow, tasteless art has been produced by those work- ing directly from nature and from im- aginative invention as has been derived from the copying of other art. It is not the source of form itself that produces what we may call the "copywork at-

titude;" it is the artist's inability to assimilate the material at a deep level of unified understanding.

Lowenfeld has enjoined us to never let a child copy anything. In his in- spired manner of passionate convic- tion, he was obviously overstating the case. To never let a child copy anything in our current image-flooded environment is impractical, unhelpful, and even impossible. To allow children to rely on the images of others entirely and never experience the invention of their own, is not art education at all. We have too often "copied" the surface of Lowenfeld's style without understanding his principle. Invention solely for the purpose of every proliferating novelty produces boredom and confusion, not meaningful creativity. The best art is not that which is simply most different from all other things. What Lowenfeld was after was not endless invention, but a practice of teaching which leads children toward a deeper appreciation of and belief in their own genuine experience, and toward the acquisition of a personal means of expressing that experience in visual form. U

BEADS CREATE YOUR OWN

GLASS BEAD ENAMEL NECKLACES

Complete supplies and instructions for creating unique enamel beads.

Bead making supplies brochure available at no charge!

Thompson Enamel Div. of Ceramic Coating Co. Box 310, Newport, KY 41072

Jo Alice Leeds is assistant professor in the department of art at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.

References The American Heritage Dictionary, New

York: Dell Publications, 1969. Arnheim, R., "Art and Humanism," Art

Education, Vo. 24, No. 6, 1971. Boime, A., The Academy and French

Painting in the Nineteenth Century, Lon- don: Phaidon, 1971.

Cennini, C., The Craftsman's Hand- book, D. V. Thompson, Jr., trans., New York: Dover Publications, 1960.

Focillon, H., The Life of Forms in Art, 2nd ed. C. Hogan & G. Kubler, trans. New York: Wittenborn, Schultz, Inc., 1948.

Kellogg, R., Analyzing Children's Art, Palo Alto, Ca.: National Press, 1969.

Lowenfeld, V., Creative and Mental Growth, New York: Macmillan, 1947.

Pevsner, N., Academies of Art, New York: Da Capo Press, 1973.

Reyno!ds, Sir J., Discourses on Art, Lon- don: Collier Macmillan Ltd., 1966. Reprinted with permission of the Hun- tington Library, Art Gallery, and Botan- tical Gardens.

Rosenberg, H., The Tradition of the New, New York: Horizon Press, Inc., 1959.


__ __ I - - - -- - - I -?I Il-Y. - - I --1 I I - I - - I IIY -- --

46



copying and invention as sources of form in art

Documents