In writing this book my main purpose is to set forth a way of thinking
about art. The most that such a book can do is to direct the thoughts,
awaken a sense of power and point to ways of controlling it.
The principles of art teaching here outlined might be illustrated in other
ways and with better examples. I hope the reader will see how each chapter
can be developed into many sets of lessons. The progressions can be
varied, materials changed, lessons amplified and different designs chosen,
providing there is no sacrifice of essentials. The book is based upon my
experience in painting and teaching for more than twenty years. The first
edition of Composition was published in 1899. In this revision I have made
many additions and used new illustrations without departing from theory or
principles. Composition was chosen as a title because that word expresses
the idea upon which the method here presented is founded—the “putting
together” of lines, masses and colors to make a harmony. Design,
understood in its broad sense, is a better word, but popular usage has
restricted it to decoration.
Composition, building up of harmony, is the fundamental process in all the
fine arts. I hold that art should be approached through composition rather
than through imitative drawing. The many different acts and processes
combined in a work of art may be attacked and mastered one by one, and
thereby a power gained to handle them unconsciously when they must be used
together. If a few elements can be united harmoniously, a step has been
taken toward further creation. Only through the appreciations does the
composer recognize a harmony. Hence the effort to find art‐structure
resolves itself into a development of appreciation. This faculty is a
common human possession but may remain inactive. A way must be found to
lay hold upon it and cause it to grow. A natural method is that of
exercises in progressive order, first building up very simple harmonies,
then proceeding on to the highest forms of composition. Such a method of
study includes all kinds of drawing, design and painting. It offers a
means of training for the creative artist, for the teacher or for one who
studies art for the sake of culture.
This approach to art through Structure is absolutely opposed to the time‐
honored approach through Imitation. For a great while we have been
teaching art through imitation—of nature and the “historic styles”—leaving
structure to take care of itself; gathering knowledge of facts but
acquiring little power to use them. This is why so much modern painting is
but picture‐writing; only story‐telling, not art; and so much architecture
and decoration only dead copies of conventional motives. Good drawing
results from trained judgment, not from the making of fac‐similes or maps.
Train the judgment, and ability to draw grows naturally. Schools that
follow the imitative or academic way regard drawing as a preparation for
design, whereas the very opposite is the logical order—design a
preparation for drawing.
Soon after the time of Leonardo da Vinci art education was classified into
Representative (imitative), and Decorative, with separate schools for
each—a serious mistake which has resulted in loss of public appreciation.
Painting, which is essentially a rhythmic harmony of colored spaces,
became sculptural, an imitation of modelling. Decoration became trivial, a
lifeless copying of styles. The true relation between design and
representation was lost.
This error is long‐lived. An infinite amount of time is wasted in
misdirected effort because tradition has a strong hold, and because
artists who have never made a study of education keep to old ruts when
they teach.
This academic system of art‐study ignores fundamental structure, hence the
young pupil understands but few phases of art. Confronted with a Japanese
ink painting, a fresco by Giotto or a Gothic statue he is unable to
recognize their art value. Indeed he may prefer modern clever nature‐
imitation to imaginative work of any period.
Study of composition of Line, Mass and Color leads to appreciation of all
forms of art and of the beauty of nature. Drawing of natural objects then
becomes a language of expression. They are drawn because they are
beautiful or because they are to be used in some art work. Facility in
drawing will come more quickly in this way than by a dull routine of
imitation with no definite end in view.
The history of this structural system of art teaching may be stated in a
few words; and here I am given the opportunity to express my indebtedness
to one whose voice is now silent. An experience of five years in the
French schools left me thoroughly dissatisfied with academic theory. In a
search for something more vital I began a comparative study of the art of
all nations and epochs. While pursuing an investigation of Oriental
painting and design at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts I met the late
Professor Ernest F. Fenollosa. He was then in charge of the Japanese
collections, a considerable portion of which had been gathered by him in
Japan. He was a philosopher and logician gifted with a brilliant mind of
great analytical power. This, with rare appreciation, gave him an insight
into the nature of fine art such as few ever attain.
As imperial art commissioner for the Japanese government he had
exceptional opportunities for a critical knowledge of both Eastern and
Western art. He at once gave me his cordial support in my quest, for he
also felt the inadequacy of modern art teaching. He vigorously advocated a
radically different idea, based as in music, upon synthetic principles. He
believed music to be, in a sense, the key to the other fine arts, since
its essence is pure beauty; that space art may be called “visual music”,
and may be studied and criticised from this point of view. Convinced that
this new conception was a more reasonable approach to art, I gave much
time to preparing with Professor Fenollosa a progressive series of
synthetic exercises. My first experiment in applying these in teaching was
made in 1889 in my Boston classes, with Professor Fenollosa as lecturer on
the philosophy and history of art. The results of the work thus begun
attracted the attention of some educators, notably Mr. Frederic B. Pratt,
of that great institution where a father’s vision has been given form by
the sons. Through his personal interest and confidence in these structural
principles, a larger opportunity was offered in the art department of
Pratt Institute, Brooklyn. Here during various periods, I had charge of
classes in life drawing, painting, design and normal art; also of a course
for Kindergarten teachers. Professor Fenollosa continued his lectures
during the first year.
The growth of the work and its influence upon art teaching are now well
known.
In 1900 I established the Summer School at Ipswich, Massachusetts, for the
purpose of obtaining a better knowledge of the relation of art to
handicraft and manual training. Composition of line, mass and color was
applied to design, landscape and very simple hand work in metal, wood‐
block printing and textiles. Parts of 1903 and ’04 were spent in Japan,
India and Egypt observing the native crafts and gathering illustrative
material.
In 1904 I became director of fine arts in Teachers College, Columbia
University, New York. The art courses are now arranged in progressive
series of synthetic exercises in line, dark‐and‐light and color.
Composition is made the basis of all work in drawing, painting, designing
and modelling—of house decoration and industrial arts—of normal courses
and of art training for children, After twenty years’ experience in
teaching I find that the principles hold good under varying conditions,
and produce results justifying full confidence. They bring to the student,
whether designer, craftsman, sculptor or painter an increase of creative
power; to the teacher, all this and an educational theory capable of the
widest application. To all whose loyal support has given impetus and
advancement to this work—to the pupils and friends who have so generously
furnished examples for illustration—I offer most grateful acknowledgments.
ARTHUR WESLEY DOW
New York, 1912