the 4 dimensional language of infancy: the interpersonal basis of art practice

The 4 DimensionalLanguage of Infancy: TheInterpersonal Basis of Art

PracticeJOHN MATTHEWS

AbstractUsing studies made in London, England, plus recent research conducted in

Singapore, this paper investigates the roots of aesthetic and design sensibilities inthe symbolic play and drawing of early infancy. This study supports Colwyn

Trevarthen’s [1996] theory that in an interpersonal space formed between caregiverand infant, facial expression, gesture and vocalisations of each partner are

orchestrated together and are given powerful expressive and representational values.Microanalysis of video recordings shows that exploratory actions impelled by theinfant are organised by patterned bursts of emotions. The rhythmic periodicities of

these actions form the structure of later art-making and design, including earlydrawing, painting and dance. There are important pedagogical implications

concerning the optimal conditions required to promote art and designunderstandings in childhood. The Congress presentation of this paper was illustratedby video-recorded observations, made in London and Singapore, of the beginnings

of expression, representation and design.

lessly scribbling, they imbue their markingIntroductionactions with profound expressive and represen-tational intention. In such a drawing the childAccording to many accounts, both old and new,

the beginnings of drawing are supposed to be is using visual medium for four interrelated pur-poses; for an investigation of visual andmeaningless, and are categorised pejoratively

under the misleading generic term ‘scribbling’. dynamic structure in itself; for the represen-tation of shape; for the representation of move-Though some writers attach some importance

to ‘scribbling’, in terms of sensorimotor practice ment and for the expression of emotion [Mat-thews 1984, 1994].and infants’ enjoyment, very few have credited

any representational or expressive meaning to This is a very different story from many otherclassical and recent texts on children’s drawing.this phase. Indeed, there is very little work on

sensorimotor intelligence as a whole, or a rec- For example, from a model of developmentderiving from Piaget and Inhelder [1956], inognition of the important cognitive and affect-

ive experiences infants have at this time, or the which earliest marking actions are thought thechaotic beginnings of a long journey towarddiscoveries they make.

Most writers do not see representational unambiguous depictions of three-dimensionalobjects as seen from a notional station-pointvalues in a drawing like Figure 1, thinking of it

as a meaningless ‘scribble’. In fact, during the in space.Twenty years of research, in London and thephase when infants are supposed to be mind-

NSEAD, 1997

286 JOHN MATTHEWS The 4 Dimensional Language of Infancy

FIGURE 1A so-called ‘scribble’ by a two year old showing 1st Generation Structures; vertical arc, horizontalarc, and push-pull

Far East, into children’s drawing practice, has art. This development, and the implications ithas for education, is little understood.taught me that we are seeing an unfolding pro-

gramme of development in which the childspontaneously generates visual structures Where do representational andwhich have expressive and representational expressive values come from?meaning right from the outset, and which formthe basis of all later visual representation and The earliest expressive actions come from the

psychological space formed between caregiverexpression. Children seem to move spon-taneously through successive generations of and infant. In this psychological envelope or

‘bubble’, body actions, especially of the hands,approaches to visual structure; from the earliest,which I have termed First Generation Structure, arms, facial muscles, form part of early dia-

logues or ‘proto-conversations’ [Trevarthento Second and Third Generation Structure [Mat-thews 1998 forthcoming]. These visual and 1987] between mother and baby. Because these

actions issue from the phylogenetically basicdynamic structures are themselves driven bydeeper ‘attractor systems’. These attractor sys- regulators of emotion and learning, deep in

sub-cortical structures, they are imbued withtems are information-seeking structures whichare responsive to certain forms of input from expressive values [Trevarthen 1995]. This means

that the infant immediately contributes to cul-the environment but not others. These attractorsdrive and shape development, causing the dis- ture with actions whose expressive qualities are

not learned – they are not the result of a longtinctive changes we find emerging in children’s

NSEAD, 1997

287JOHN MATTHEWS The 4 Dimensional Language of Infancy

induction into arbitrary semiotic systems – but later ages, and represented in various forms. Anare, on the contrary, spontaneous expressions early task for the infant may be to co-ordinateand indices of affect. This is a field of ‘emphatic both place and movement [Bower 1982]. Thesetransactions’ between the partners, in which concerns are at the centre of some early usageeach is sensitive to a universal, biologically of visual media.standardised time-base in which any variationin tempo, cadence and stress, becomes trans- Perception of shapeparently significant in terms of affect [Trev-

New-borns are able to detect the moving partsarthen 1987, 1995]. Each partner tunes into therhythmic periodicities of the other’s patterned within the contour of their living, animated,actions, timing his or her own contributions to mother’s face. Visual structures within the ani-fit into the interstices of the other’s actions, in mated, living mother’s face, particularly verticesan elaborate dance of movement of face, eyes, around the eyes, may have the level of com-arms and hands. plexity which is interesting to infants and which

These expressive actions, emerging at birth, form the basis of invariant or non-accidentalbetween mother and child, are the substrate structures in early representation.upon which all later expression and represen- Later, from 3 months, perception of detail,tation is founded. In exquisitely orchestrated shapes inside closures, vertices, junctions, sharpinterchanges between infant and mother, these illumination gradients and texture gradients areactions become further emotionally saturated seen. These become new ‘attractors’. Theyand given meaning. This idea alone, has pro- guide attention toward some aspects of the vis-found implications for the course of represen- ual environment rather than others.tational and expressive development; how we Driven by subcortical structures, self-mot-understand it and provide for it. ivated, intentional actions made towards certain

patterned events and objects give rise to theShape, location and movementdeep structures of art. These attractors are per-

Recent experimental work with neonates has haps not best conceived as blueprints of shapesshown that they do not enter the world as blank

in the brain, rather they are highly motivated,slates or tabula rasa [Bower 1982, Spelke 1985].

action-seeking ‘interests’, and these motiv-They are born with at least two sets of schem-

ational forces converge on certain patternsata; one concerned with the shape, location and

within the environment in terms of either, ormovement of objects; the other concerned with

both, their visual and kinematic shape.relating to people. These different schemata areWhen objects are shown by the caregiver tolinked together and form the basis of later vis-

the child, these are carefully inserted into theual representation.interpersonal space. Typically, the caregiverSkills in the handling, viewing, and visualwill accompanying these displays with a ‘com-tracking of objects, are developed in relation-mentary’, [Harris 1989, p. 22] closely calibratedship with the caregiver. This has a profoundwith his or her actions, which themselves areeffect on how the child constructs visual rep-organised around the child’s focusing and atten-resentation. Visual systems for finding outtional behaviours.where things are and how things move, are

Observations show the emergence of threelinked with other systems about form, colourbasic actions which play an important part bothand texture to form descriptions of the identityin object-mastery, and in the expression ofof objects.emotion and in communication. These are FirstMy informal observations support the idea ofGeneration Structure.a vertical decolage of development in which

early understandings about movements, theirdirections and axes; ideas about appearanceand disappearance are later explored all over at

NSEAD, 1997


First Generation Structure

Vertical arc; horizontal arc and push-pullThese structures emerge from initially syner-gistic responses to interesting stimuli in whichall limbs are auto-reflexively activated together.The infant begins to differentiate and exploitthree kinds of actions of the arms which will beof enormous importance in early drawing: thevertical arc, the horizontal arc and the push-pull.

Whilst intentional reach and grasp are beingperfected, so this allows the release of earlier FIGURE 2basic actions, horizontal and vertical arc for Actions are given expressive andother purposes. The vertical arc is crashed, representational values within an interpersonal

spaceslapped and thumped against all manner ofobjects and surfaces, in order to test both thesurface and the hand itself and the strength ofits owner. The same action, practised across a cated play involving, occlusion, line-of-sight,

viewpoint. These have all been co-ordinatedrange of different situations, offers up very dif-ferent sorts of information. Hannah learns that into a patterned sequence in which both part-

ners share an understanding of timing as asome objects fall, roll, clatter, or even disinte-grate when they are struck. With the same means to build up suspense, excitement and

happiness.action, she may splash water, play notes on apiano, make a Jack-in-the-Box pop up with a

First markssquealing cry, or stab a paint brush against asurface and see an image appear. It is inevitable that at some point in the infant’s

investigation of the effect of his or her actionsDriven by internal processes, play betweeninfant and caregiver changes dramatically at upon all manner of objects and surfaces within

the environment, that the infant comes to makeround 9 or 10 months, with the infant showinggreat eagerness to join in with the play of these actions on materials which leave traces.

These are liquids or semi-liquids of severalknown and familiar others and to share experi-ences of happiness and wonder [Trevarthen kinds, sometimes including paint, but also

including food and even regurgitated milk!1995]. Now, the infant and caregiver share playexperiences which often centre around toys or Marking actions made in targets like pools of

milk are really derivations of reach and grasp.objects which become invested with emotion-ally powerful qualities. For example, the infant First Generation Structures also come into play,

as the infant makes further discoveries aboutlearns a great deal about lines-of-sight andview-point and occlusion in play with the par- the mark-making potential of some kinds of

liquids and substances.ent or caregiver. In Figure 2, a ten month oldbaby plays a ‘Peepo’ game with her father.

Horizontal arcIn this play, we can see the transformation ofearlier interaction between infant and caregiver. At 13 months, by pressing his palms in spilt milk

and fanning his arms in two horizontal arcsShared perceptions of carefully calibratedevents; interpersonal detection and analysis of against the floor of the kitchen, Joel describes

two, interlocked segments of an arc [Matthewscues of intention and motivation; visual trackingbehaviours; interpolation and prediction of tra- 1990; 1994]. A few days later, he ‘amplifies’

[Bruner 1964] this natural action by tool-usejectories, object-manipulation and vocalisationhave all been unified in a complex and sophisti- when he applies it with a brush.

NSEAD, 1997


Vertical arcThe vertical arc also makes contact mark-mak-ing materials. The powerful over-arm arc isslapped down into any attractive target of spiltmilk or food.

Push-PullThe push-pull is similarly applied to mark-mak-ing media.

A visible record remains, on a surface, ofactions performed – actions which in other cir-cumstances would have been invisible.

FIGURE 3Impelled by internal motivational processes toexplore the environment, these actions are pro-jected into the world in measured bursts ofemotion and the resultant paintings and draw-ings are the ephemeral abstracts of time.

At around this time, some infants also noticethe interesting ‘trace-making’ effects [Michotte1963, p. 289], caused by dashing certain, specialobjects against surfaces. These objects aremark-making instruments of various kinds, pen-cils, pens crayons, and brushes.

We go on to see how these actions are syn-thesised to form the more complex structuresof Second and Third Generation Structure.

Early synthesis of structureIn a systematic process of ‘infrastructural inves-

FIGURE 4tigation’ [Bickerton 1981], infants from 18months to two year three months start to com-bine different types of drawing action intorhythmic periodicities, countering, or balancing,as it were, one type of action with another. Forexample, rapid horizontal arcing gestures maybe followed by push-pulling gestures, or by ver-tical arcing, stabbing movements. In thesecases, the contrasting of actions has a directresult in terms of contrasts in visual form. Thesedynamic structures may reiterate or even sup-port the structure of conversations – they arelike visual conversation pieces or ‘topics’[Chafe 1994].

Second Generation StructureFIGURE 5Rotation, demarcated line-endings, travellingDrawings showing mainly 2nd Generation

zig-zags Structures including demarcated line endings,This synthesis and differentiation of actions and continuous lines, collinearity, continuous

rotation and travelling zigzagsshapes continues. As Figures 3 to 5 show, the

NSEAD, 1997


FIGURE 6

FIGURE 8Closed shape plus nuclei allow the child torepresent inside and outside relations as anexample of 3rd Generation Structure

Third Generation Structure

Closure, inside/outside relations, core andradial, collinearity, angular attachments andright-angular structuresThe entire family of mark-making gestures sofar described are organised together andundergo transformation. This involves the

FIGURE 7association or combination of some or all of theFour year old children move hand-held spacefollowing; closure, inside/outside relations,craft through rotational and ascending flightcore and radial, collinearity, angular attach-paths, carefully monitoring any visualments and right-angular structures. The childtransformation due to changes of positiondiscovers structural principles which enablehim or her to generate whole new families ofhybrid forms.child generates continuous rotation, demar-

cated line-endings, travelling zig-zags, continu- Sometimes, dots or blobs are placed insidean empty space which has been left in theous lines and discontinuous displacements in

time and space. The child continues to think centre of a rotational shape. This signals theencoding of inside and outside relations. Laterabout the moving point, and lines are explored

as continuous entities. this will become very explicit and purposeful,when the child uses a closed-shape, plusIn symbolic play also, the continuous linear

journey is practised in a variety of ways; for internal and external nuclei, to specify insideand outside relations. Beginnings and ends ofexample, hand-held toy space-craft are flown

through graceful trajectories as in Figures 6 and lines continue to be noted by the child, and areoften demarcated by aiming a mark or a spot7. The trajectory play of these four year olds

echoes each other as they move their hand-held at one or both ends of a line. Dots are clusteredtogether or run in chains and trails; markingsspace-craft through elliptical parabolas, con-

stantly monitoring the visual transformations become targets for further vigorous aimed stab-bings of the pen. Patches of pigment, intenselyoccurring due to changes of position. These

skills in handling and viewing objects are built applied by push-pulling or arcing gestures aresuperimposed over each other or placed nextupon those early understandings formed in

infancy in relation to a caregiver. to each other. Right-angular structures are more

NSEAD, 1997


consciously formed, with the intention of adult companion. The three Figures 10 to 12 areselected from a sequence that shows a non-attaching or connecting lines one to another at

contrasting angles. Lines are run alongside each interfering but supportive interplay betweenadult and child.other, forming the beginnings of parallelism, or

collinearity. Another significant structure occurs In this rich painting event, Hannah deploysonly Second and Third Generation structure, yetwhen children can choose to restrict a rotational

action to a single elliptical, and sometimes near initiates and controls a complex quanta ofbehaviours involving actions of the limbs, facialcircular, sweep of his pen or brush. This is the

closed-shape. expression, speech, object-manipulation, tool-use and emerging image, all of which are satu-Unless children encounter destructive teach-

ing, these attractors are robust, and can be car- rated in powerful expressive values.Painting events like this are self-initiated andried across media domains; for example from

dance to drawing, or from traditional media to self-generated. Nevertheless, the child is able tosustain and extend these dynamic structureselectronic paint.and their rich possibilities only because of the

Electronic paint subtle and discreet support she receives fromher mother, Linda. Yet Linda says only a veryIn studies made by John Jessel and myself in

Goldsmiths’ College, University of London, we few words, and appears motionless most of thetime; the communication consisting mainly offound that very young children, who have

barely begun to use traditional drawing media, exchanged glances, and the subtlest nuances offacial expression and body movement. Thisuse the same basic visual action structures to

investigate the expressive and representational support is empathic, and is built upon those‘shared acts of cognizance’ [Trevarthen 1980] ofpotential of the mouse-driven, microcomputer

paintbox [Matthews and Jessel 1993]. The same early infancy. Both infant and mother share afield of view which is also a field of action. Thispattern of action, applied to different media,

causes subtly different effects, and helps the consists not only of the physical surface of thepaper, the pots of paint and brushes and so on,child build up understandings about structural

variations. it is also a window opening onto a variety ofpotential but unknown futures. Using the termsAs objects are assimilated into the interper-

sonal, psychological space between infant and with which Ray Jackendoff [1994] describes lan-guage, it is a ‘window on consciousness’.caregiver so, gradually, more complex action

patterns, processes and procedures are also Neither mother nor child have any idea aboutwhere the painting will go. This has impli-incorporated into the dance between child andcations for pedagogy. Simplistic ‘aims andobjectives’ curriculum design is usually pitchedat the most trivial level.

The approach I am advocating is part of adevelopmental curriculum, in which teacherand child are companions on an intellectualadventure. The main principles remain thesame as we move up the age-range. Unlikenational curricular, this approach is not definedin terms of a body of knowledge, planned apriori, and simply transmitted to the learner.Nor is it tied to the transmission of any parti-cular culture, it appears to be the fundamentalbasis of human interaction. In the exampleFIGURE 9shown in Figures 13 and 14 of a young ChineseA three year old using continuous rotation with

both traditional and electronic paint teacher supporting two year old Kingsley’s con-

NSEAD, 1997


FIGURE 13FIGURE 10

FIGURE 14This developmental approach is not culturallybound. In a Singapore nursery, a two year oldconstructs with blocks with his teacherappearing to do little, yet she shares andFIGURE 11supports his actions and views in subtle wayscrucial to his development

struction with blocks, like an English motherand child in this shared field of action, hardlya word is spoken, yet the subtle actions HweeHuang makes are crucial to Kingsley’s learning.

ConclusionIn this paper I have argued that visual represen-tation and expression are built upon interac-tions occurring within an interpersonal spaceformed between caregiver and infant [Trev-arthen 1995].

We must, of course, be cautious about howFIGURE 12we conceptualise the construction of laterPainting episode by a 2 year old and herexpressive and representational behavioursmother who discreetly supports the child’supon these earlier interactions. Each particularactions without interfering – companions in an

intellectual adventure expressive and representational medium will

NSEAD, 1997


require its own medium-specific skills. Never- fication and support of modes of representationand expression as they emerge in infancy andtheless, these action-quanta form a prelude to

early drawing and other representational childhood. Only then will one be in a positionto provide the kind of interaction and provisionactions in the sense that they create a psycho-

logical orientation toward events, objects and necessary to promote intellectual andemotional growth.processes, which will allow basic expressive

and representational actions to emerge. Thedevelopmental approach is based on the identi- John Matthews

References

Bickerton, D. (1981) The Roots of Language. Karoma and electronic paint: the beginnings of drawingwith traditional media and computer paintbox,Publishing: Ann Arbor(shortened version), Early Years, London. Spring,Bruner, J. S. (1964) The course of cognitive growth,13, 2, pp. 15- 22American Psychologist, vol. 19, pp. 1–15

Michotte, A. (1963) The Perception of Causality.Bower, T. G. R. (1982 2nd edn.) Development inMethuen Manual of Modern Psychology,Infancy. Freeman: San FranciscoMethuen: LondonChafe, W. (1994) Discourse, Consciousness and

Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1956) The Child’s Concep-Experience in Speaking and Writing. University tion of Space. London: Routledge and Kegan Paulof Chicago Press Spelke, E. (1985) Perception of unity, persistence and

Harris, P. (1989) Children and Emotion: The Develop- identity: thoughts on infants’ conceptions ofment of Psychological Understanding. Blackwell: objects, in Mehler, J. and Fox, R. (Eds.) (1985)Oxford Neonate Cognition: Beyond the Blooming, Buzz-

ing Confusion. Erlbaum: New Jersey, pp. 98–113Jackendoff, R. (1994) Patterns in the Mind: Languageand Human Nature. Basic Books Trevarthen, C. (1987) ‘Motives for culture in young

Matthews, J. (1984) Children drawing: are young chil- children: their natural development through com-dren really scribbling? Early Child Development munication’. A paper presented at the Inter-and Care, vol. 18, pp. 1–39 national Symposium on the Nature of Culture,

Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, September 1987Matthews, J. (1990) Expression, Representation andDrawing in Early Childhood, Unpublished Ph.D Trevarthen, C. (1980) The foundations of intersubjec-Thesis, University of London tivity: the development of interpersonal and coop-

Matthews, J. (1994) Helping Children to Draw and erative understanding in infants, in Olson, D. (ed.)Paint in Early Childhood: Children and Visual The Social Foundations of Language andRepresentation. 0–8 Series, Series Editor Tina Thought: Essays in Honour of J. S. Bruner. W. W.Bruce, Hodder & Stoughton Norton: New York, pp. 316–42

Matthews, J. (1998 forthcoming) The Art of Childhood Trevarthen, C. (1995) Mother and baby – seeing art-and Adolescence: The Construction of Meaning. fully eye to eye, in Gregory, R., Harris, J., Heard,Falmer Press: England P. & Rose, D. (Eds.) The Artful Eye. Oxford Uni-

versity Press, pp. 157–200Matthews, J. and Jessel, J. (1993) Very young children

NSEAD, 1997

the 4 dimensional language of infancy: the interpersonal basis of art practice

Documents