DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES IN CHILDREN’S DRAWINGS OF A CUBE AND A DOLL

Abstract

1. Introduction Children's drawings have been studied for more than a century. Considerable amount of this research has been dedicated to the drawings of two models, a human figure (or a doll) and a cube. Comparison of the studies with these models, however, gives an impression that drawings of a cube and a human figure have very little in common. Developmental changes in the representation of a cube are analysed in terms of lines, number, orientation and integration of the faces of a cube, utilisation of obliques, perspective (e.g., Cox & Perrara 1998, Nicholls 1995, Nicholls & Kennedy 1992, Toomela, 1999). Drawings of other geometric solids, like cylinders (Caron-Pargue 1992, Toomela 1999), tetrahedrons and cones (Chen & Cook 1984) are usually analysed in similar terms. In most cases the drawings of human figures are analysed in a very different language. Perhaps the most commonly used scheme for the analysis of human figure drawings describes the number, proportion and quality of body parts drawn (Goodenough 1926, Harris 1963). Other schemes differentiate scribblings, tadpoles, where the head is not differentiated from the body, and conventional figures, which include the main body parts, head, torso, arms, and legs (Cox 1993). 2. General stages in drawing development 2.1. Stages proposed by Luquet The most influential taxonomy of drawing development was proposed by Luquet (1927). According to him drawing develops over four phases or ages. First scribblings or involuntary designs are followed by fortuitous realism, after that develops, and finally drawings are characterised by visual realism. Progression from one phase to another is not abrupt. The earlier phases, especially realism, do not entirely disappear after the next phase has begun. In the last decades Luquet's taxonomy, especially the transition from to visual has been extensively studied. The studies have shown that the strong form of the proposition according to which young children draw they know, whereas older children and adults draw they see, does not hold. Even quite young children have the capacity for view-specific what they see drawing. Nevertheless, the differentiation of and visual is not entirely wrong. There is at least a shift in emphasis from one kind of depiction to another (e.g., Cox 1992, 1993). The age-related shifts in drawing style from to visual are a function of growth in awareness of the distinction between an object and its visual presentation. Children acquire the understanding of to change and to ignore in visual input for creating a realistic drawing (Reith, 1988, 1990). 2.2. Problems with Luquet's approach: drawings of a cube Luquet's taxonomy is not sufficient for describing simultaneously the development of drawing a cube and a human figure. It can be proposed that drawings of a cube, where more than three visible faces are depicted, reflect intellectual realism whereas drawings with only three depicted faces are realistic. There is, indeed, such a developmental shift in the depiction of a cube. First intentional representational drawings of a cube, however, are single squares (Cox & Perrara 1998, Nicholls & Kennedy 1992, Toomela 1999). Thus, instead of two stages, and visual realism, at least three stages should be differentiated in the development of the intentional representation of a cube--a single square, which is followed by drawings where more than one face of a cube in visually unrealistic relations between faces is depicted, which, in turn, is followed by a convergent or foreshortened oblique drawing of a cube (Toomela 1999). 2.3. Stages proposed by Willats In the present context it is important that Luquet's taxonomy does not differentiate wholistic drawings from drawings where faces or regions of a model are denoted. …