IELTS|Upper-Intermediate|14. Aboriginal art

pic1_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Read the list and tick the features typical of aboriginal art

Match the captions to the right pictures and speculate on the possible function of each type of art


Discuss the questions below

1. In what sort of places in Australia do you think you might see examples of Aboriginal art?

2. What features do you notice in the paintings?

3. How do you think the way this art is produced has changed over the years?

4. What challenges may the Aboriginal art face in the contemporary society?

Read the text and fill in the gaps with appropriate words

pic2_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14


Match the words below with their definitions

pic3_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Look at the exam task below and answer the questions 1-2

1. How is the lecture structured?

2. What type of information do you need for each gap?

pic4_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Listen to the recording and complete questions 1-10

pic5_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Listen to the recording and complete questions 1-10

We’re going to have a look today at Aboriginal art and painting, which actually dates back 60,000 years, making it one of the oldest art traditions in the world. Now, as long as indigenous people have been living in Australia, they’ve been creating different types of art. So let’s start by having a look at some examples of ancient art. It includes things like, as you can see here, rock paintings, bark paintings… even some sand drawings like this have been found. Then there’s the whole area of body art, which is so important for ceremonial practice, and lastly, here are some examples of decorative art on weapons and tools.

The oldest art examples today are the rock paintings because, obviously, rock is more durable than other materials and so the art has been preserved. In fact, most of this work is inside caves — largely because there, it’s been sheltered, hasn’t been destroyed by the weather, while the paintings on outside rock surfaces have often been washed away over the years. Now, there are enormous variations in the style of Aboriginal rock art, depending on its age and location. Dot paintings are one of the best-known visual art forms of Aboriginal culture in which a surface is covered in small dots to reveal symbols.

Typical ones include arrows like this — here’s a water hole, and these are animal tracks. You get to see both the abstract dot paintings and more naturalistic art… you get both in rock art of various ages. As the ancient Aborigines didn’t have a written language, the key purpose of much of this rock art was storytelling, which has had a great significance for younger generations.

Let’s move on to look at the materials. Er, whatever they were painting, traditionally Aboriginal people all over Australia used pigment, such as ochre, to make paint. Ochre’s very finely textured natural rock and, um, well, they used this because ochre is plentiful across most of Australia. It’s coloured by iron oxide, which is the mineral that makes a lot of Australian outback soil — in places such as Ayers Rock — what is known as «Uluru red’, Uluru being the Aboriginal name for Ayers Rock. However, depending on the exact conditions under which it formed, the shade can be anything from yellow to orange, red, purple or dark brown. Today, ochre occurs in many archaeological sites, and archaeologists at one site have discovered what appears to be an artist’s palette of ochres, dating back 18,000 years.

Preparing the ochre paints was time-consuming work. First, the appropriate rocks had to be found and collected. Then the rock had to be broken up and ground into a powder, and that had to be mixed with some sort of fluid to bind it into paint. Nowadays, the binder most commonly used is professional artist’s acrylic binder, but in the past, Aboriginal people used things like tree sap, or something similar like bush honey. Other fluids must also have been used but wouldn’t have held paint on rock or a piece of bark for thousands of years, so sadly those paintings would have been lost.

So, how have things changed? Well, modern Aboriginal is a mixture of the old and the new. Things changed in the 1970s really when Aboriginal people from many different parts of Australia, particularly south Australia, central and northern Australia, took up acrylic painting and began to paint on canvas.

Taking a modern approach has had many advantages. It saves artists a great deal of time, and they can still choose to use the traditional yellowish-reddish-brownish colours if they wish to. But perhaps the most important fact is that, unlike bark and rock paintings, the modern paintings are easy to sell. In fact, painting on canvas has given Aboriginal people an opportunity to showcase their art to the world and keep their ancient culture alive. Modern Aboriginal art, particularly dot painting, has taken off and started selling on a big scale internationally. Aboriginal art can also be found on pottery and various musical instruments like didgeridoos and clapping sticks. Together, these have become some of the most popular souvenirs in Australia. Their artists, like other artists in the world, are now able to earn a living doing something they are passionate about.



Exam tips

Note-completion

1. Quickly read the title and the notes to see the overall structure.

2. Make sure the word or phrase you use is the right part of speech (noun, noun phrase, verb, adjective, etc.).

3. Use words you actually hear. If you can’t, use words that express the same idea.

Watch the video and decide whether the statements below refer to the exam recording from the previous slide, video or both

It actually documents our history, our culture, the things that happen in the personal self of the future. And people think: well, how could art be a written language? Do comparisons. We’re all human beings all over the world. You have the Egyptian hieroglyphics. And the word hieroglyphics in the Greek hieros glyphiros ‘sacred carvings’, and they’re only being deciphered now, still being deciphered. That they document the Egyptian history all the way through. It’s a written language in art. Similarly to that is South America — the Inca, the Aztec and the Mayan culture. There’s also an art form of hieroglyphics, which documents a history, which is still being translated. A little bit closer to us in Australia we have the South Pacific, for instance the Polynesian structure of the Maori especially, their carvings, their tattoos. We call Moko on the face, and on the arms, on the body. They are also documenting their Iwi, or their clan groups, the whole structure — who they are and where they come from. So, art is a written language, depending on the person, who understands that as a written language. Also art documents our belonging, our belonging to the land, the importance of the land. Because in Aboriginal culture, it’s not just the land — it’s what’s on the land and in the land, we become as one with the land. So we understand the animals but … the plants the birds, the fish. We have to know the whole structure, we know how they breed, how they migrate, where they live, time to hunt. So everything is a part of that whole structure that we have to understand and so art helps document that whole history.

Songlines can be very complicated. The word songlines comes from the English translation of islets in English, song lines. In our culture we understood the whole area where we lived but also the structure of trade and ceremony. So, you’d move from one piece of your way where you belong to to another clan group and so you’d have to move through the land. So songlines are actually maps of the land. To give you an idea — you got a group, say, a hundred people: men women and children. They’re living in an area, they’re camping there, they go out hunting the men go out looking for the emu, the wallaby, the kangaroo and the fish and so forth. The women go out looking for the the seeds, and the wild fruits, and things that they will use for cooking. And so, what happens as you’re going out to hunt over a period of time, you have to go a little bit further — the animals get a little bit scarcer. In our culture you do not destroy. So what would happen then — the warriors would report back, the women would report back — it was getting scarcer and further to go to hunt and to gather their food source. The elders would come together. They’d have a meeting and then they would decide it’s now time to leave that area. You don’t destroy it because it has to regenerate and regrow again. So, we move on before we destroy it. And so, they will sing of the land they’re moving into, they’ll sing of the rivers, the bend in the river, the rock formation, the trees, the food source that’s found there. And the people knowing the land intimately they know exactly where they’re going. And as they’re going along these tracks, or songlines, or maps of the land, they’d be singing of the earth because sacred areas, sacred places, things that have happened in the past. So, they’re singing and chanting all the way along and giving thanks to the earth to the mother. The English see that and they’ve seen that the people called them songlines because we moved around the land to protect it. We were natural greenies and ecologists.


Answer the questions below

  1. How important is modern/indigenous art in your culture?
  2. Is modern art less skilful/valuable than traditional art?
  3. In what ways do modern art forms differ from traditional ones?

pic6_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Click on the button and speak on the topic

Speaking Part 1 Questions

  1. Are you keen on modern art?
  2. Do you think art classes are necessary? (Why?)
  3. Are you good at cooking? Who taught you to cook?
  4. What is your favourite leisure activity?
  5. What benefits can you get from painting as a hobby?
  6. What kinds of things do you like to draw?

Read the task and prepare your 2-minute speech on the topic «An old thing preserved in a family»

IELTS Speaking Part 2

Describe a thing which is made by one of your ancestors and is preserved in your family for a long time (e.g. a handicraft, clothes, or housewares).

You should say:

  • what it is;
  • what it is used for;
  • how it is made/produced;

and explain what you feel when you use or look at this thing.

Questions for discussion after Speaking Part 2

1. Should a government make special effort preserving the aboriginal art? Why?

2. What measures can be taken by individuals for saving indigenous art?

1. canvas
2. cave
3. bark
4. binder
5. date back
6. durable
7. handicraft
8. indigenous
9. naturalistic
10. ochre
11. palette
12. pigment
13. pottery
14. preserve
15. reveal
16. sap
17. shelter

pic7_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Choose the correct option

You are going to hear a lecturer talking about ancient forms of art. Before you begin, look at these pictures and decide where they might originate from


Now listen to the lecture

As part of our series of talks on the history of visual art, I’d like to talk today about three forms of ancient art: cave paintings, petroglyphs and geoglyphs. Now, when we talk about cave paintings, we’re usually referring to paintings on cave walls or ceilings, but we can also include paintings on rocks and other surfaces outside. We can trace some of these paintings to the Upper Paleolithic era, which is around 40.000 years ago, and most of them have a similar theme, that is, wild animals such as bison, deer, bears and lions. Humans, when they’re shown, are almost always shown in a hunting context. Interestingly, human hands also feature, and abstract patterns are a recurring theme.

A variety of materials were used to create these paintings, probably chosen for their vivid colours. Red and yellow ochre were the most common, but other painting materials included manganese oxide and hematite. Charcoal was the principal material used for the outlines. In most cases, the paintings were made directly on the flat rock surface, but occasionally a silhouette of the subject was cut into the rock first. Paintings made in this way are generally much better preserved than others.

There has of course been much debate about why cave paintings were made. Were they simply put there for decoration, or did they serve a particular purpose? One theory suggests that images of animals were seen as possessing magic qualities, that painting them onto walls would increase the number of animals in the area and hence increase the food supply. I would dispute this, as while early humans would have wanted a ready supply of animals for food, this wouldn’t explain why lions and bears are portrayed. There is, after all, no evidence that humans preyed on these animals. Quite the opposite, in fact – they would have done anything to avoid them! Perhaps one problem with working out why these paintings were made is that we’re trying to understand the prehistoric mindset with a 21st-century mind. The simple fact, unfortunately, is that we’ll probably never know why they’re there.

OK, onto petroglyphs. These are images cut or carved into vertical or horizontal rock surfaces, and are mainly associated with prehistoric people going back about 12,000 years. However, some tribal societies continued making them for much longer, often until contact was made with more advanced cultures in the 20th century. In terms of subject matter, petroglyphs usually consist of geometric designs, but animals and people also feature. As with cave paintings, we’re not sure why they were put there, but they may represent some kind of not-yet-fully understood symbolic or ritual language. What we do know is that even now they have a deep cultural significance for the descendants of the people who made them.

What is particularly interesting about petroglyphs is the similarity of designs across different continents. How could this be, when the people who made them could not possibly have come into contact with one another? One theory suggests that the similarities are a result of the genetically inherited structure of the human brain. Many of the geometric patterns, known as form constants, which recur in petroglyphs have been shown to be «hard-wired» into the human brain: they frequently occur in visual disturbances and hallucinations. Geoglyphs are drawings or motifs on the ground, and are made either by arranging stones, stone fragments, rocks and gravel, etcetera on the surface to create positive geoglyphs, or by removing the top layer of ground to expose the rock beneath, creating a negative geoglyph. Size-wise, they’re large, at least four metres across, and appear in various places around the world. The most famous are perhaps those in the Nazca Desert, a high arid plateau in Peru. These Nazca Lines, as they are known, were created about two and a half thousand years ago, and consist of hundreds of individual figures representing creatures, er, like birds, spiders, monkeys and lizards. What is particularly interesting is that, because of their size and position, these figures can only really be identified from the air. So, assuming the people who put them there couldn’t fly, why make something that nobody could see?


Look at the notes and follow the instructions in the box

1. Identify three art forms above you will hear being described, and the order in which they appear.

2. Decide what type of information you need for each gap (part of speech, a word/phrase, plural or singular). You can write your ideas in the gaps 1-10

3. Think over the structure of the lecture to predict what part of the recording will comprise the answer.

4. Before completing the questions, make sure your answers are right using the checklist below

a) you have used no more than the number of words and/or numbers allowed;

b) you have provided a complete answer to each question;

c) your answer makes sense in the context of the sentence;

d) you have not made any spelling mistakes;

e) the word forms you use are the same as in the lecture.


Check yourself

1. Art forms 2, 5, 1 (in that order)

2. The lecture is divided into three clearly-defined sections, each one focusing on a different art form. There are slight differences in some of the content for each section.

pic8_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Listen to the lecture again and complete the notes. Use no more than two words and/or numbers

As part of our series of talks on the history of visual art, I’d like to talk today about three forms of ancient art: cave paintings, petroglyphs and geoglyphs. Now, when we talk about cave paintings, we’re usually referring to paintings on cave walls or ceilings, but we can also include paintings on rocks and other surfaces outside. We can trace some of these paintings to the Upper Paleolithic era, which is around 40.000 years ago, and most of them have a similar theme, that is, wild animals such as bison, deer, bears and lions. Humans, when they’re shown, are almost always shown in a hunting context. Interestingly, human hands also feature, and abstract patterns are a recurring theme.

A variety of materials were used to create these paintings, probably chosen for their vivid colours. Red and yellow ochre were the most common, but other painting materials included manganese oxide and hematite. Charcoal was the principal material used for the outlines. In most cases, the paintings were made directly on the flat rock surface, but occasionally a silhouette of the subject was cut into the rock first. Paintings made in this way are generally much better preserved than others.

There has of course been much debate about why cave paintings were made. Were they simply put there for decoration, or did they serve a particular purpose? One theory suggests that images of animals were seen as possessing magic qualities, that painting them onto walls would increase the number of animals in the area and hence increase the food supply. I would dispute this, as while early humans would have wanted a ready supply of animals for food, this wouldn’t explain why lions and bears are portrayed. There is, after all, no evidence that humans preyed on these animals. Quite the opposite, in fact – they would have done anything to avoid them! Perhaps one problem with working out why these paintings were made is that we’re trying to understand the prehistoric mindset with a 21st-century mind. The simple fact, unfortunately, is that we’ll probably never know why they’re there.

OK, onto petroglyphs. These are images cut or carved into vertical or horizontal rock surfaces, and are mainly associated with prehistoric people going back about 12,000 years. However, some tribal societies continued making them for much longer, often until contact was made with more advanced cultures in the 20th century. In terms of subject matter, petroglyphs usually consist of geometric designs, but animals and people also feature. As with cave paintings, we’re not sure why they were put there, but they may represent some kind of not-yet-fully understood symbolic or ritual language. What we do know is that even now they have a deep cultural significance for the descendants of the people who made them.

What is particularly interesting about petroglyphs is the similarity of designs across different continents. How could this be, when the people who made them could not possibly have come into contact with one another? One theory suggests that the similarities are a result of the genetically inherited structure of the human brain. Many of the geometric patterns, known as form constants, which recur in petroglyphs have been shown to be «hard-wired» into the human brain: they frequently occur in visual disturbances and hallucinations. Geoglyphs are drawings or motifs on the ground, and are made either by arranging stones, stone fragments, rocks and gravel, etcetera on the surface to create positive geoglyphs, or by removing the top layer of ground to expose the rock beneath, creating a negative geoglyph. Size-wise, they’re large, at least four metres across, and appear in various places around the world. The most famous are perhaps those in the Nazca Desert, a high arid plateau in Peru. These Nazca Lines, as they are known, were created about two and a half thousand years ago, and consist of hundreds of individual figures representing creatures, er, like birds, spiders, monkeys and lizards. What is particularly interesting is that, because of their size and position, these figures can only really be identified from the air. So, assuming the people who put them there couldn’t fly, why make something that nobody could see?



Exam tips

Notes completion

1. Quickly read the title and the notes to see the overall structure.

2. Make sure the word or phrase you use is the right part of speech (a noun, noun phrase, verb, adjective, etc.).

3. Use the words you actually hear. If you can’t, use the words that express the same idea.

pic9_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14

Read the passage and do the task in the green box

Australian Aborigines Demand Return of Remains

As a former British colony, Australia has close cultural and historical links with the United Kingdom, due to the British and Irish settlers who arrived in droves in the 19th and 20th centuries. One aspect of this contact is the role of Britain, and British archaeologists and collectors, in taking Aboriginal bones, relics and artefacts from Australia to museums and collections in the UK. Now leaders of the indigenous people of Australia, the Aborigines, are demanding that any Aboriginal remains in the UK are returned to Australia.

In 19th century Britain, there was a mania for collecting all kinds of objects from other countries. These were sent home, where they were kept in museums such as the British Museum and the Natural History Museum. Museums in the UK have a huge number of such objects − objects which, say protesters, were basically stolen during Britain’s long colonial history, with little or no regard for the feelings or rights of the people to whom the objects originally belonged.

Now the Australian Prime Minister is supporting Aboriginal calls for the objects and remains to be returned to their original home. A spokesman for the Aboriginal Council of New South Wales, Stevie McCoy, said: «The bones do not belong abroad. They belong here. This is about beliefs, and a traditional Aboriginal belief is that our ancestors can only find peace if their remains are buried in the homeland.»

There are certainly lots of Aboriginal remains in the UK, although their exact locations are not entirely clear. What is known is that, between them, the British Museum and the Natural History Museum have some 2,000 — 25,000 artefacts composed of human remains, although the museums point out that only about 500 of these are of Aboriginal origin. Dr William Cowell Bell, for the London Museum Association, adds that «A lot of the objects are not human remains in their original form, but are made out of human remains. These include decorated skulls and bones from which charms and amulets have been created.» A smaller number of similar artefacts are known to be held in collections in Oxford and Cambridge.

There is some sensitivity to Aboriginal demands in the archaeological world. Lady Amanda Spurway, life president of the Glover Museum in London, says that the museum has had its small collection of Aboriginal remains packed ready for return for a decade, and is only waiting for information about where they must go.

The National College of Surgeons says it will return the remains of any individual who can be named (although it is obviously difficult to put names to them after such a long time). This growing sensitivity to the hitherto ignored rights of indigenous peoples around the world has caused some relics to be restored to their original country, particularly in Scotland, where a group of Aboriginal remains has already been returned. Edinburgh University has returned skulls and bones to Tasmania and New Zealand.

One problem, according to legal expert Ewan Mather, is that the law allowing museums to decide what to do with these objects is more relaxed in Scotland. English museums, on the other hand, are not allowed (either by law or by the groups of trustees who run them) to just hand back remains of their own accord. However, British supporters of the Aborigines claim that such restrictive laws are inhumane in the modern world, and that it would be a simple enough matter to change them in order to allow the items to be returned.

A further objection to handing back relics is because of their scientific value, claim some museum directors. Dr Bell believes that the size of the collection in the Natural History Museum in Lincoln made it a very valuable resource in the analysis of the way of life of Aborigines, and could be used to study the origin and development of the people. Breaking up the collection might mean that such knowledge could be lost forever.

Aboriginal groups, however, respond by pointing out that the scientific importance of the remains has to be seen against a backdrop of human rights. «I doubt whether the British government would allow several thousand bones of British soldiers to be used for ‘scientific purposes’ in any other country,» said Steve McCoy, with a hint of irony. «Would the families allow it? I think there would be a public outcry, no matter how old the remains were. This practice [of taking bones and human remains] went on from the first moment the white man came to Australia right up to the early part of the 20th century. It is a scandal.»

The British government, meanwhile, has announced that it will set up a working party to discuss the possibility of changes to the law. This might allow museums to negotiate on their own with Aboriginal and other groups around the world.


Write the correct letter A, B, C, D or E in boxes 4-9

pic10_IELTS|Upper-Int|L14


Australian Aborigines Demand Return of Remains

As a former British colony, Australia has close cultural and historical links with the United Kingdom, due to the British and Irish settlers who arrived in droves in the 19th and 20th centuries. One aspect of this contact is the role of Britain, and British archaeologists and collectors, in taking Aboriginal bones, relics and artefacts from Australia to museums and collections in the UK. Now leaders of the indigenous people of Australia, the Aborigines, are demanding that any Aboriginal remains in the UK are returned to Australia.

In 19th century Britain, there was a mania for collecting all kinds of objects from other countries. These were sent home, where they were kept in museums such as the British Museum and the Natural History Museum. Museums in the UK have a huge number of such objects − objects which, say protesters, were basically stolen during Britain’s long colonial history, with little or no regard for the feelings or rights of the people to whom the objects originally belonged.

Now the Australian Prime Minister is supporting Aboriginal calls for the objects and remains to be returned to their original home. A spokesman for the Aboriginal Council of New South Wales, Stevie McCoy, said: «The bones do not belong abroad. They belong here. This is about beliefs, and a traditional Aboriginal belief is that our ancestors can only find peace if their remains are buried in the homeland.»

There are certainly lots of Aboriginal remains in the UK, although their exact locations are not entirely clear. What is known is that, between them, the British Museum and the Natural History Museum have some 2,000 — 25,000 artefacts composed of human remains, although the museums point out that only about 500 of these are of Aboriginal origin. Dr William Cowell Bell, for the London Museum Association, adds that «A lot of the objects are not human remains in their original form, but are made out of human remains. These include decorated skulls and bones from which charms and amulets have been created.» A smaller number of similar artefacts are known to be held in collections in Oxford and Cambridge.

There is some sensitivity to Aboriginal demands in the archaeological world. Lady Amanda Spurway, life president of the Glover Museum in London, says that the museum has had its small collection of Aboriginal remains packed ready for return for a decade, and is only waiting for information about where they must go.

The National College of Surgeons says it will return the remains of any individual who can be named (although it is obviously difficult to put names to them after such a long time). This growing sensitivity to the hitherto ignored rights of indigenous peoples around the world has caused some relics to be restored to their original country, particularly in Scotland, where a group of Aboriginal remains has already been returned. Edinburgh University has returned skulls and bones to Tasmania and New Zealand.

One problem, according to legal expert Ewan Mather, is that the law allowing museums to decide what to do with these objects is more relaxed in Scotland. English museums, on the other hand, are not allowed (either by law or by the groups of trustees who run them) to just hand back remains of their own accord. However, British supporters of the Aborigines claim that such restrictive laws are inhumane in the modern world, and that it would be a simple enough matter to change them in order to allow the items to be returned.

A further objection to handing back relics is because of their scientific value, claim some museum directors. Dr Bell believes that the size of the collection in the Natural History Museum in Lincoln made it a very valuable resource in the analysis of the way of life of Aborigines, and could be used to study the origin and development of the people. Breaking up the collection might mean that such knowledge could be lost forever.

Aboriginal groups, however, respond by pointing out that the scientific importance of the remains has to be seen against a backdrop of human rights. «I doubt whether the British government would allow several thousand bones of British soldiers to be used for ‘scientific purposes’ in any other country,» said Steve McCoy, with a hint of irony. «Would the families allow it? I think there would be a public outcry, no matter how old the remains were. This practice [of taking bones and human remains] went on from the first moment the white man came to Australia right up to the early part of the 20th century. It is a scandal.»

The British government, meanwhile, has announced that it will set up a working party to discuss the possibility of changes to the law. This might allow museums to negotiate on their own with Aboriginal and other groups around the world.


Follow the instructions in the box

Watch the video about dot painting and do the test

Hi there! Currently I’m working on a painting of platypus. And I’m currently doing a bit of dot painting around the edge of it. You can see that I’ve got some dots already started around here with the circles. And the dots that are downside here are representing the waterways the Platypus swim in. I’ve done the outline of the platypus. And I’ll be doing some line painting on those platypus later. But I’m just working on the dots at the moment. Paint really needs to be not too thick and not too runny. This needs to be that right consistency so that it goes on nice and evenly. And if you’re using the stick if you’re going to nice round end on the stick the dots will come out nice and even as well. You do need to make sure that you’ve got the pipe at that really nice flowing consistency so. Because, if it’s too thick it’s going to blubber and if it’s too thin and actually the dots does tend to run away and they don’t stay nice and round. You’re fond of if you use stick to… It’s really better if you do about two dots and then load some more paint on the stick. Another way that some Aboriginal artists do that dots is by using a squeeze bottle with a really fine nozzle on the end. And if you’re using squeeze bottle you can just keep doing your dots, you don’t have to stop it line up the paint. Oh, I prefer I prefer to use the stick because it just works better for me. I find it easier to use. It takes a little bit of practice to be adding nice dots with the squeeze bottle. Certainly, a lot of artists do use the squeeze bottle and may get some really beautiful clean red dots with the squeeze bottles. Normally, I am… a lot of my artwork is actually often in the earth tones: the reds, the browns, and the yellows, and the oranges. I really like working with them… earth tones. This particular one, I’ve actually gone for the blues. Partly, I think because of the subject being the a platypus. And platypus, of course, live in the water. And a lot of Aboriginal artists these days are going into more contemporary and bright colors. And it’s really effective that… the… the blues in this is really beautiful one. It will stand out beautifully once it’s finished. So it’s a bit of a new area for me going to the blues and the aquas. But I’m actually really liking what’s coming up.

I’ve probably paid about, I’d say, six hours working this one so far. It does take a lot of time. Especially once you start working with the finer dots. I start out with there… with fairly large dots, what I would call large… large dots. And then, some areas where I’m trying to represent the water and the bubbles I’ve got into finer dots. You can see there which, obviously, take a longer to do too.


УрокУрок HomeworkHomework КурсКурс
  • Warm-up
  • Indigenous art
  • Shades of ochre
  • Ancient and modern art
  • Australian Aboriginal Art
  • Analysing results
  • Handicraft
  • Art words
  • Types of aboriginal art
  • Art in Australia
  • Rights of Aborigines
  • Ancestors' presence
  • Dot painting