A NOTE ON THE DRAWING OF MOVEMENT 



ANYONE who has watched a greyhound running 

 /Jm must feel that the undulations of the animal, 

 ^ .m. with their rhythmic series and culminating 

 accents, are comparable to the run and rhythm of an 

 air in music, whereas a momentary phase of the 

 movement, such as is recorded in an instantaneous 

 photograph, resembles a detached chord, and, like it, 

 has little meaning out of its context. 



Why is it that the instantaneous photograph almost 

 invariably fails to capture any of this rhythmic sensa- 

 tion, or to recreate enjoyment such as is experienced in 

 watching the greyhound run, whereas certain pictures 

 successfully do so ? 



Is it not because our sense of movement is a subjec- 

 tive impression with which consequently the artist alone 

 can deal ? 



While most people enjoy watching, shall we say, 

 dancing, very few of them seem truly to be conscious of 

 the source of their enjoyment. The majority appear to 

 be unaware that their pleasure lies in following the 



visible music of motion, not in observing the dancers, 

 who are only the instruments by which it is performed. 

 As a result they are willing to accept as a picture of 

 dancing a Hfeless picture of dancers, which no more 

 recalls the rhythms that were the essence of their plea- 

 sure than a picture of a violinist with his bow upon the 

 strings revives the sounds that he was making. 



How then is the artist to capture this emanation, at 

 once so real and so transitory ? 



Perception of movement is the result of combining 

 mentally a series of separate impressions. 



In consequence our perception of movement is a 

 subjective impression, so that in making a drawing of a 

 moving figure or object there can be no question of 

 copying the movement, no question of accuracy in 

 the ordinary sense in which it is appUed to the 

 drawing of objects at rest. This is a point of capital 

 importance, although apparently very few people, 



13 



