Derek Page's memories of working on the Foundation Course

I have started to contact people who used to work with me on the Foundation Course and let them know I have started this blog. Derek Page was one of the full-time staff and a core member of the team when I started in the academic year 1974/5. He had also been a student at Leeds so some of the staff, (Gavin) had taught him.

This is what he sent me. He has also sent me a reminder of several other drawing sessions, which I will get to and try and explain how they were used when I have time. As it is, today I'm doing dissertation tutorials all day, 9.00am till 7.00pm, so Derek's thoughts will replace mine.

Derek Page's memories of working on the foundation course.

I used to do a 'performance' preamble to a drawing day trying to focus students just starting the Foundation course on one of the simplest things the student needs to know when coming to grips with a sheet of A1. (I still don't know if good 'composition' is instinctive or is learned through repeated exposure to basic elements of.)

I would start by asking them to reduce the sheet to a perfect square based on the width of the paper. They would then pin them on the wall, and I would then congratulate them on completing their first successful drawing of their Foundation Year. Puzzled looks all round. But hopefully they would soon realise why I could say that.

To prolong the exercise to the point of embarrassment I would ask them to gather round and stare at a sample square on the floor (usually still painted black after the previous year's Final Show.) Eventually I'd place a white A4 sheet nearby and invite opinions as to which was the strongest form, square or rectangle. Usually there was a majority that thought that the square was stronger.

I'd then place a smaller square of black paper in the centre of the white square so the sides of the two squares were parallel (I'd like to say that the black square was carefully worked out to some obscure Fibonacci influenced dimension, but in truth it was just a square that more or less 'looked right'.) I'd then ask if the square had been diminished or strengthened by the addition of the black square. I don't recall there ever being any agreement over this but as the object was to have them look hard, think and form an opinion, rather than me persuade them one way or the other I wouldn't push this. Instead I'd talk about a balance between the black and the white, each being positive and equally integral to the image (usually shortened  to "positive/negative")

Next step was to twirl the black square around so that its 4 corners were aligned with the midpoints of the sides of the white square i.e.. so it formed a 'diamond' within the square. Another discussion about the differences between the two alignments reached agreement that square on square was passive, static, balanced, whereas diamond on square was more dynamic, unsettled. All so basic. Brief mention of layout (image v. text) advertising, geometric structures within classical painting (spears and cherubs). Why a wibbly wobbly ill-considered shape, or a pale grey shape just wouldn't cut the mustard in this context.

Next an equilateral triangle within the square, usually produced uncertainty, until swapped for an isosceles triangle which quickly became identified as less strong as an image but strongly directional as a form. Placed on a diagonal pointing directly into a corner of the square, the temptation to 'follow' the direction of the arrow could easily be appreciated, and opened up the way to its conversion from 2D image to being an object, exploring two-sided drawings (and it wouldn't be long before some Pink Panther fan would cut a trap door into the other side). Rounding off to talk about communication through visual language.

Depending on the time of year the day could develop into drawing on a cube using directional forms and positive/negative imagery to invite the viewer to rotate the object, developing hinged forms, inside/outside forms, mobius strip etc. (A bit of a tester here for 3D interest) exploring the surprise element / the unexpected or a resolution on the journey round an object  (I forget who the critic was who commented on Barbara Hepworth's work in terms of: if you have seen one side you feel no compulsion to walk round to see the other - it will be the same.)

From the half hour starting point the possibilities emerging from the day had to be seized on as they developed (like taking a child for a walk in the countryside, its no use saying we must get to the top of Simon's Seat as that kind of distant objective doesn't work - they will want to collect conkers and acorns, poke sticks into cow pats and splash in puddles) - a 'seat of the pants approach' is needed which makes a nonsense of lesson plans or whatever paperwork is demanded now.

The value of the introduction, I thought, was that it was clear, visual, and laid down the basic fact that (an implied) geometry can be used as a 'stiffener' in planning a drawing. Half an hour well spent if it stuck. As so often the work itself is a waste product - how often did we say that? The whole point is to spend time looking at simple things and realising there is quality here.

The roots of this demonstration stemmed from working with Gavin Stuart as a student. Somehow I had ended up with a sheet of A1 divided into 2cm. squares. These squares were being individually 'adjusted' to black with cutout black sugar paper as instinct dictated. Some of the black squares were modified with strips of white paper (soon grubby with cow gums they were stuck, removed and stuck again), again as the need was felt. Everyone else seemed to be doing 'proper' drawings. I could never understand a word that Gavin said, partly because his diction was a little slurred or what was said came from some other planet (it didn't get much better when I started teaching on the course) but things like "positive/negative" and "finding ways through" and "jeeeez" and "dyoounnerstantha" kept re-occurring. I stared at this bloody thing for a week until my eyeballs popped out. Sometimes it wasn't there when I came in in the morning, but miraculously it re-appeared after I'd been for a cup of tea (it was said that Gavin took student work home to think about them overnight). But the positive/negative thing has stayed with me to this day. (A few years ago I made the mistake of sending a homemade Xmas card to Elspeth - she said I drew like a Foundation student!)

A postscript to this is I have a painful memory of going home to Newcastle for the Xmas break, going to the local pub where my ex-school mates would be and stupidly trying to talk about what I had learnt in my first term at art college. I realised that whatever planet Gavin was on, as far as they were concerned I was on it too.