Brush Drawing for Nature Notebooks

Miss Mason, in her admirable system at the House of Education, gets her students to bring back leaves and buds of trees from their walks, and to copy them in “Brushwork,” with name, locality and date attached to each. The twigs with buds they secure early in the spring, and later in the year compare their sketches with the same trees when in full leaf. This is an excellent way of teaching the students to know the many varieties of trees and shrubs, and to identify them at any time of the year. (Perin, Brush Drawing II, p. 454)

When you take a nature walk, you may see a specimen or two that you would like to bring home to paint in your nature notebook. Of course, you must be considerate of the next person who will walk that trail and therefore, you should never pick flowers or take home objects that are protected or of which there are only a few. We know this was a problem in Charlotte Mason’s day, as it was written about often, and it can still be a problem today. I once took a walk with my daughters with the sole intention of showing them a beautiful flower I had seen the day before, only to find it was gone. Maybe a person picked it, or perhaps a deer ate it, but you can imagine my disappointment when it wasn’t there.

It’s useful to note that the drawings we see in the House of Education student-teacher notebooks are not of rare or endangered species. Instead, students just mentioned these flowers in their notes and then made paintings of the more common flowers. For the most part, my own book includes wildflowers from my yard that most gardeners would call weeds. In fact, on more than one occasion I have asked my husband to please weed-eat or mow around a new plant in our yard so that I could look at it more closely later — the latest having grown almost overnight to a height of seven feet! (If you are imagining him rolling his eyes at me, you would be correct.) I also love to paint grasses, which are abundant in almost any region. Once you start noticing them, you will see there is such variety, and they are all so graceful and beautiful.

In the book Botany in a Day, Thomas Elpel explains that related plants typically have similar floral features. For example, plants of the mustard family (Brassicaceae) have four petals with six stamens (4 tall, 2 short.) His book introduces eight of the world’s most common plant families. A good project would be to find a common species from each of these families to paint in your nature notebook.

You could also take a more in-depth look at a family by considering similar plants in the same genus. For instance, there are at least thirteen species of fiddlenecks, a genus of flowers in the borage family (Boraginaceae). One, the Amsinckia grandiflora, is a species found in California that is critically endangered, but the rest are common wildflowers. If a person got to know the Borage family well, and maybe even a common species of fiddleneck, there would be little desire to pluck the rare Amsinckia grandiflora if it were seen. It would be enough to gush about it in your nature notes. Another idea is to paint a series of plants that are similar to one another and therefore easily mistaken.

If you find something that you would like to paint while taking a nature walk, but you don’t think you will be able to do so right away, put it in a glass of water until you can get to it. I have been amazed at how long some wildflowers can last in this way. Of course, it makes good sense because even though wildflowers can look delicate and frail, they are clearly vital enough to make it in the wild! Hence the derogatory name of weeds!

Still, we must recognize that a nature walk is not the only place to find specimens to paint. In fact, in her article “Nature Study” Drury said: “But we do not go for a nature walk in order to ‘find something to paint.’ In the country, every walk becomes a nature walk for people who are in the habit of observing things.“ (p. 189) Sometimes it is enough to just take in everything around you while enjoying a nature walk and later write some notes. Then, when you have a few minutes to paint, choose something that is closer to home. Charlotte Mason said:

Milkwort, eyebright, rest-harrow, lady’s-bedstraw, willow-herb, every wild flower that grows in their neighbourhood, they should know quite well; should be able to describe the leaf––its shape, size, growing from the root or from the stem; the manner of flowering––a head of flowers, a single flower, a spike, etc. And, having made the acquaintance of a wild flower, so that they can never forget it or mistake it, they should examine the spot where they find it, so that they will know for the future in what sort of ground to look for such and such a flower. … accustom children to make careful brush drawings for the flowers that interest them, of the whole plant where possible. (Vol 1, p. 51-52, emphasis mine)

You may not recognize the names of the wildflowers Miss Mason listed, but I can tell you that they are incredibly common wildflowers. Polygala (milkwort) is a genus of about 450 species, Onagraceae (willowherb) includes about 650 species, and Galium verum (lady’s bedstraw) is even considered a noxious weed in some places. I must admit, I would be happy to eradicate the Graceful bedstraw from my yard! And yet, these are the things Charlotte Mason wanted of students to learn well and draw — the plants in their own neighborhood.

Another project that was encouraged by all of the examiners, and would be most conveniently done in your own neighborhood, was to make a study of a tree or flower, making drawings at each stage (e.g., the bud, opening flower, finished flower, fruit, fresh leaves and chewed leaves.) Also, the life histories of butterflies, moths, and beetles were welcome. A compilation of this type could be done on a single page, making an attractive and informative study, or it could be done throughout the book as the seasons change.

It is good to choose a specimen that will fit on a single page of your notebook, as the natural history teachers all noted that objects should be painted true to size. Agnes Drury clarified: “I should like to see many more paintings instead of the fashion of painting sprays so large as to take up two pages. Subjects suited to size of the book should be preferred.” (PR 56, p. 54) Of course, that is not a hard and fast rule. In fact, students were often encouraged to make monthly maps of the stars or to draw objects, such as mosses, as they look through a microscope. In the case of the latter, Drury explained: “Paintings done under the microscope should have a note of the scale, which can be read from the instrument.” (PR 53, p. 60)

Agnes Drury strongly encouraged students to accomplish at least one painting per week. One year, while preparing her report on the House of Education student-teacher notebooks, she even counted the drawings made: “On the whole there are not nearly enough paintings. The average IS one per week or fewer for nineteen months.” (PR 53, p. 59) But you can take comfort in the fact that once you sit down to paint, you have not committed to something that will consume your whole afternoon. One benefit of brush drawing is that it can be accomplished very quickly. In the article “Nature Notes, part 2,” I quoted Charlotte Mason to say:

Half an hour a week in the actual time table time [is] given for the entry of the nature notes & the illustration but most students I think give a few minutes a day to entering notes of what they have seen in that days walk or perhaps painting some objects (the illustrations once a student gets into the way of it can be done in a surprisingly short time). (p. 4)

Just a few years before that, in his article “Nature Work at the House of Education,” Geldart wrote:

The original sketches are almost invariably brush-paintings in water-colours without outline, a method which catches the “gesture,” as Mr. Ruskin calls it, and general character of a plant better than drawing with a point or with a hard outline. Of course these drawings can only be considered as sketches, there is no time for really finished work ; finish comes afterwards, when the student has left Ambleside, and presumably is able to give more time to each drawing (p. 490)

From both of these comments, we can see that the House of Education student-teachers had very little time to spend working on paintings for their nature notebooks. Many of you feel the same — simply thinking about getting the paints out and having to clean up afterward can take more motivation than you have. However, I would like to encourage you that brush drawing is the very best medium available to make a quick and easy sketch, that still provides much information to the observer.

Consider the following drawings in May Openshaw’s nature notebook from June 25, 1912. It’s worth noting that in Thornley’s report, he said of Openshaw’s notebook: “The Drawings are very pleasing.” (PR 25, p. 232) Indeed, you can well see the characteristics of each plant, or the “gesture” as quoted above. In the drawing of the Scrophularia Aquatica (left) you can see that the stem is straight and upright, that the tiny leaves are opposite, and that the flowers form clusters at the end of their stems. In the drawing of the Heartsease Pansy (right) you can see that the flower is solitary and grows lateral to the stem. You can also see that the leaves have serrated margins and are oval with a short point. Lastly, both drawings depict the color of the flowers and the particular green of the stems and leaves.

And yet, if you look more closely at the images, you’ll notice that these paintings are simple and were likely produced in mere minutes. Miss Openshaw did not labor over the details of the flowers, but she was still able to portray representative shapes and colors.

In 1913, after inspecting the student-teachers’ work, Oscar Browning submitted an Examiner’s Report which included the following note:

After hearing these lessons I inspected the Handicrafts and Painting of the students, which were particularly interesting. … Of extreme interest were the diaries kept by the students of their observations of nature with admirable illustrations. These gave to me, as they have in previous years, especial pleasure, as they would to anyone who examined them. The drawing and painting were very creditable, and especially notable were the sketches completed in four minutes. (PR 25, p. 154, emphasis mine)

Four minutes! If you knew you could accomplish a credible nature drawing in four minutes, would the prospect of getting the paints out seem so daunting? Maybe not.

You might have noticed that the terms “brush drawings” sometimes shortened to just “drawings”, “paintings,” and “sketches” are used interchangeably in this article and in the referenced quotes. Still, none of these references are talking about the use of a pencil. While you might think that making a sketch with a pencil would be quicker and more easily done, a sharp point is a challenging and unsympathetic tool with which to draw. In the article “Drawing in Infant Schools,” C. A. Rooper said, “Those who wish children to learn to take in and love the grace of growing forms will realise how much more readily the reproduction of them may be made by the sweep of the brush than by the stroke of the pencil.” (Part 3, p. 911) With a single sweep of the brush, a stem is portrayed. Another sweep and you have made a leaf. Wait just a moment and add another layer to depict a shadow or a deeper color in a particular area. These things must be learned and practiced of course, but once mastered, a painting can be laid down in a flash.

In fact, it may come as a surprise to learn that it takes substantially more time to portray the same amount of information when using a pencil. Drury explains why this is: “Pencil sketches, if advisable (which I do not admit), should be more and not less accurate than brush drawings.” (PR 52, p. 62) Below is a pencil drawing of a Douglas-fir pine cone that I made for a natural history illustration course. It took me almost two hours to complete. (Pine cones are not nearly as simple to draw as they seem.) However, the brush drawing of the same object only took me 30 minutes! That includes the time it took to mix my paints and wait between layers for it to dry. In fact, while I was waiting for the paint to dry, I was able to complete the two moth paintings shown below.

I would also ask you to consider how long a pencil drawing might last compared to one made with watercolor. It would be a shame if the work in the nature notebooks we have been studying throughout this series had been made in pencil and had deteriorated. We are thankful that these books have lasted over one hundred years, and your grandchildren may be glad of the same.

Faster than a brush drawing or a pencil sketch would be the inclusion of a photograph, but Agnes Drury warned: “There should be no room for the pasting in of charts or photographs. It departs from the single aim of recording what has been seen by means of brush drawings with added notes of times and places.” (PR 51, p. 121)

Charlotte Mason’s purpose for keeping a notebook was less about creating an artistic work, and more about recording what one has seen. In the article “The Teaching of Nature Study,” V. C. Curry who for a time replaced Drury as the House of Education natural history teacher, concurred with her predecessor: “What we want recorded in the note-books is what the children have seen themselves. That is the value of a painting. It is impossible to turn out even rather a bad painting without looking—and no one else’s looking will help you.” (PR 36, p. 534)

Looking closely at a specimen with the intent to paint what you see, is far more involved than the kind of looking required to recognize or identify it. Quickly seeing and naming a Daisy, for instance, is not the same as studying how many petals it has or precisely what shade of white they are or determining what is going on in the center of the flower. With this kind of looking, you will often notice things you have missed before. Rooper said:

Many a pleasant moment might be spent in leisure time over such pursuits. Indeed, by copying carefully from the real object the wonderful secrets of its structure will be learnt and really known, and thus the outside world will become a real interest to the child, and not a mere thing of course—a thing without meaning, but a part of its life, and a happy part (PR 13, p. 735)

In the next article, I will explain how to make a brush drawing for your nature notebook. In the meantime, be looking around for something you might like to paint. I recommend that you start with something simple, such as a small wildflower, a mushroom, or a stalk of wild grass, rather than a pinecone or a peony!

Resources:

Botany in a Day (website), which includes a 46-minute video tutorial.
Botany in a Day (book): by Thomas J. Elpel
See the article Notes, part 1 for suggested supplies (including notebooks and paints.)

References:

Browning, Oscar. “Our Work.” Parents’ Review, vol. 25, 1914, pp. 153-155.
Curry, V. C. “Teaching of Nature Study.” Parents’ Review, vol. 36, 1925, pp. 529-537.
Drury, Agnes C. “Nature Study.” Parents’ Review, vol. 24, 1913, pp. 187-190.
Drury, Agnes C. “Our Work” Parents’ Review, vol. 51, 1940, pp. 121–122.
Drury, Agnes C. “Our Work” Parents’ Review, vol. 52, 1941, pp. 62-63.
Drury, Agnes C. “Our Work.” Parents’ Review, vol. 53, 1942, pp. 59-60.
Drury, Agnes C. “Our Work.” Parents’ Review, vol. 56, 1945, p. 54.
Geldart, H. “Nature Work at the House of Education.” Parents’ Review, vol. 9, 1897, pp. 487-495.
Mason, Charlotte M. Home Education, Vol. 1, 1886.
Mason, Charlotte M. “Draft Letter from CM (in E. Kitching’s Handwriting) to Rev. Alfred Thornley Re Nature Diaries at the House of Education & 2 Letters from Rev. Alfred Thornley to Charlotte Mason on His Examination of Nature Diaries [Nature Notebooks] 1901-1903 Box PNEU2A, File pneu11 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Internet Archive, Charlotte Mason Digital Collection, 1901, archive.org/details/PNEU2AFilepneu11/page/n1.
Perrin, H. “Brushwork I.” Parents’ Review, vol. 4, 1893, pp. 453-457.
Perrin, H. “Brushwork II.” Parents’ Review, vol. 4, 1893, pp. 453-457.
Rooper, C. A. “Drawing in Infant Schools, Part III.” Parents’ Review, vol. 4, 1893, p. 904-912
Rooper, C. A. “How to Interest Children in the Outdoor World.” Parents’ Review, vol. 13, 1902, p. 732-735
Thornley, Alfred. “Our Work.” Parents’ Review, vol. 25, 1914, pp. 231-232.

Photo Credits:
Archive.org, Charlotte Mason Digital Collection, May Openshaw, 1912.

Return to An Overview of School Science

(← last article | next article →)