There’s a difference between what the words say and what’s in our heads.
We tried to separate the details our imagination adds when we hear a story, to focus only on the details that the words give us. It’s tough (for grown-ups, too!).
If I say, “The monkey ate a banana,” and you could only draw these words, what would be on your page? Just a monkey eating a banana, we agreed. No setting. No motivation. And we still wouldn’t know what size to draw the monkey or how much of the banana he’d (she’d?) eaten.
And if we let our imaginations add details to “The monkey ate the banana,” we might draw (as Nitzanim imagined):
- a monkey on a beach in a lounge chair
- a monkey in New York, swinging on a branch
- one monkey throwing the peel backwards, hitting the next monkey on the head!
Come see our efforts to draw the story of the flood story in Genesis 6 – 9 with only the details that the text gives us (in Rm. 209).
1 ping
[…] Last week, Nitzanim focused on understanding the story of Noah and the ark as it’s written in the Torah. We didn’t allow ourselves the luxury of imaginging details; our drawings were strictly what we could know from the Torah’s words. […]