
The Elements of Drawing: John Ruskin’s Teaching Collection at Oxford [video] - wyclif
http://ruskin.ashmolean.org/education/8989/9033
======
magetathelion
John Ruskin was a prominent art critic during the late 1900's who held in
great esteem the academic art of the period. His works are a good illustration
of the generally held attitudes of that period, but he was on the wrong side
of the notion of abstraction that began to take root in Paris. Further
reading: [http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-
britain/exhibition/turn...](http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-
britain/exhibition/turner-whistler-monet/who-what-when/ruskin-v-whistler)

~~~
byroniczero
Nice try, calling it the “wrong” side. For more on that side, check out Art
Renewal Center:
[https://www.artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/TheReal19thCe...](https://www.artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/TheReal19thCentury/thereal19thcentury.php)

~~~
Dylan16807
Being on the wrong side of a movement just means the losing side, nothing
objective.

~~~
byroniczero
I had considered that, but still detected — perhaps incorrectly — a whiff of
implied denigration in the choice of what to say about Ruskin and how to say
it.

My comment was an attempt to establish a neutral balance by linking to an
argument in favor of the wrong side. If anyone has a good argument for the
right side — for why abstraction rules and traditional drawing, painting, and
sculpting skills are worthless — I would love to read it. Hopefully, it
amounts to more than “because we have photography now”.

I may disagree with what I perceived as the tenor of the original comment, but
I saw no reason to downvote it. I see no reason why mine should have been
downvoted, either.

------
marcolinux
I liked how he challenged our edge-detection NN in lesson 3. With a gray
paper, it is possible to use a dark and white pencils, making 2D looks like
3D. He does it again in lesson 8, drawing some leaves.

