In 1865, the Brussels educational reformer Pierre Temples advocated to take drawing as the cornerstone of education. He criticized that education was modelled on conventions and grammatical rules in order to learn to read and write, this way ignoring the potential of drawing to create new concepts. This paper is also concerned with the significance of drawing in the realm of education. However, not to elaborate on its added value for education, but to discuss the mode of thinking that it seeks to disclose. The paper starts with a re-reading of two stories: Pliny the Elder's image of the origin of drawing and Viktor Lowenfeld’s artistic developmental theory. This brings us to an understanding of the significance of drawing not as a pure sensory experience, nor as a cognitive one, but as a new gesture that marks the visual as visual, to make it an object of thought. Unlike Temples, this contribution is not against grammar, but understands the act of drawing as a form of grammatisation in itself: i.e. a particular response to an event, which simultaneously enables us to visualize what confronts us. Hence, an ability to imagine and create new relationships with the world.

1865年，布鲁塞尔教育改革家皮埃尔·坦普尔（Pierre Temples）提倡将绘画作为教育的基石。他批评说，教育是以惯例和语法规则为模型的，以便学习阅读和书写，这种方式忽略了绘画创造新概念的潜力。本文还涉及绘画在教育领域中的重要性。但是，不是要详细说明其对教育的附加价值，而是要讨论它试图揭示的思维方式。本文首先重新阅读了两个故事：老普林尼（Pliny the Elder）的绘画起源形象和维克多·洛文菲尔德（Viktor Lowenfeld）的艺术发展理论。这使我们对绘画的重要性的理解不只是一种纯粹的感官体验，也不是一种认知体验，而是一种标记视觉的新手势。作为视觉，使其成为思想的对象。与Temples不同的是，这种贡献并非违背语法，而是理解绘画本身就是一种语法化形式：即对事件的特定反应，同时使我们能够直观地看到面对的事物。因此，可以想象并与世界建立新的关系。