What's wrong with learning by experiment?
To correctly interprete results of an experiment requires
experience, which beginners lack by definition, or they would not
be beginners.
Which turns this into a chicken-and-egg sceniaro.
But using high school or even college chemistry as an example, you
have the scenario of extremely inexperienced people getting ready to
use sensitive, delicate, instruments using potentially dangerous
materials and even possibly explosive methane from the tap.
These same students (assuming they are conscientious) will be
consulting and studying and and all materials available from
textbooks and the library in an effort to understand the background
necessary to perform the experiment successfully.
Children and young adults have either a teacher or a lab-assistant
respectively to supervise and provide safety. But the supervisor
doesn’t really teach in a lab, the students are actually teaching
themselves how to utilize the apparatus.
That’s in a school setting. In my own setting, being a post-grad in
engineering but having no experience in art, I resort to studying
everything I possibly can, and consulting as many people as I can, to
get as much background as I need to understand what is essentially an
engineering process utilized in a possibly artistic manner.
As far as art is concerned, I’m learning however slowly. I already
understand symmetry and contrast, and I’m beginning to understand the
basic concepts behind positive and negative space.
The result of this is that I can now feel potential designs coming
together in my mind, and being able to recall which process might to
use to most easily create it. Then I can pick which design I think
might be most feasible in my current skill set, with a little bit of
stretch either for greater sophistication or for learning some new
basic methods.
I guess that’s progress. You’ll see what I’m talking about by
Mother’s Day.
Andrew Jonathan Fine