‘Every child is a natural creator’⁸: The Children’s Art School of Brazil and the newspaper Arte & Educação

Founded in 1948 in Rio de Janeiro by the journalist, artist and educator Augusto Rodrigues, the EAB met the need felt by the Brazilian cultural medium, as of the 1940s, for a reorientation of methods that provided the little ones with “[...] the right and the means for them to develop their creative capacities” (^{Ferreira, 1956}, p. 42). The inspiration for creating a place for children to express themselves freely, without requirements as to attendance or performance evaluations, would have come from the educator Helena Antipoff and from the works of the Argentine poet Javier Villafañe (1.500 trabalhos..., 1953).

At the beginning of its activities, the EAB operated “[...] under the sign of individual freedom” (^{Jean, 1950}, p. 6), in order to allow children to express, discover themselves, and feel accomplished in a joyful and carefree environment. It was created in a period of redemocratization, after the fall of Getúlio Vargas, favorable to the educational renewal (^{Barbosa, 1985}). However, Augusto Rodrigues’s motivation for such an initiative was also attributed by himself to other experiences, such as an English children’s art exhibition held in 1941⁹ in the capital of Rio de Janeiro. The show, organized by Herbert Read, would have revealed “[...] new methods of education, in which children could release their creative impulses while free of any coercion” (^{Escolinha..., 1968}, p. 22). Another factor would have been the rejection of productions created by Brazilian children in an exhibition held at the Pedagogical Center of Milan in 1948, on the grounds that there was “[...] no truly free creation by Brazilian children” (^{Arte..., 1949}, p. 23), which generated the perception that something should be done towards an education in art more attuned to the ideas spreading in the European and US contexts.

The commitment of the EAB and other similar institutions was “[...] to give children possibilities to experiment with all techniques, all materials, and to express themselves freely” (^{Crianças..., 1951}, p. 1-4). The intention was to stimulate children’s self-expression through artistic and recreational activities aimed at their aesthetic development, as well as their emotional and social adjustment (^{Lobo, 1952}). According to Lúcia Alencastro, the EAB’s principal in 1953, its objective was for the child to gradually evolve to an aesthetic conscience, in accordance with the experience obtained with the constant exercise of the languages of the arts (^{1.500 trabalhos..., 1953}). To this end, the first experience to be guaranteed was freedom of expression, as that would result in the development of their creative capacity.

These concepts that supported the EAB, together with the children’s exhibitions, which disseminated its actions, were linked to the modern trends of education in art that dialogued with assumptions from psychology and pedagogy, defending the importance of art in educational processes, children’s freedom of expression, and the non-intervention of adults in this process.¹⁰

During its active years, the EAB was the main representative of the Education through Art Movement [Movimento de Educação através da Arte] (MEA), maintaining relations with international organizations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the INSEA (International Society for Education Through Art). It also had the support of figures such as Sylvio Rabelo, Paulo Freire, Oswaldo Goeldi, Anísio Teixeira, Lúcio Costa, Nise da Silveira, Poty Lazzarotto, Helena Antipoff and Lívio Abramo, who acted as its collaborators or promoters. The support of wide-circulation communication vehicles was a constant in the spread of its ideas and actions, which included workshops for children, exhibitions, courses for teachers, debates and performances. On some occasions, the press mobilized to warn of the precariousness of the Institution and the need for greater investment from the State. Since its launch, in 1970, the newspaper Arte & Educação counted on the most effective support of the newspapers O Dia and A Notícia, who committed themselves to printing it. The distribution of new editions by vehicles such as Jornal do Brasil, Diário de Notícias and Correio da Manhã, from Rio de Janeiro, Diário da Tarde, from Curitiba, and O Fluminense, from Niterói, contributed to the initial success of the publication.

In the introductory text of the inaugural edition of the newspaper Arte & Educação, defined as the organ of the Children’s Art School of Brazil, Augusto ^{Rodrigues (1970}) justified the undertaking by the need to record the Institution’s activities and for an exchange with other children’s art schools that had been created some time before in Brazil and abroad. However, the idea of its creation can also be seen as a strategy to give visibility to the Institution, helping it be provided with resources.

The association of intellectuals with the project was great, inciting manifestations such as that of the critic, curator and art historian Frederico ^{Morais (1970}, p. 3, author’s emphasis):

With some delay, I receive the first issue of the newspaper ‘Arte e Educação’, published by the Children’s Art School of Brazil, head of the ‘art in education’ movement in Brazil and that today includes about 50 units, among those officially registered. The newspaper, as stated by Augusto Rodrigues in his presentation, emerges to stimulate communication and exchange between children’s art schools in the country and abroad.

Published in the ‘Artes Plásticas’ [Plastic Arts] column, the text presented the authors of the articles of this first issue, emphasizing the essay in memory of Herbert Read, Nise da Silveira, and, from that, weaving an analysis of art from the viewpoint of the author and of Carl Jung, confirming the presence of psychology in the art in education movement.

With a 28 x 38 cm size and monochromatic printing on thick paper, Arte & Educação had 25 issues published throughout its life cycle (1970-1978), with the first one, issue zero, being of an experimental character, in addition to five commemorative editions after this period. Most editions came out with 16 pages, including a large number of images. Nevertheless, the maintenance problems that affected the EAB ended up reflected in its editorial project, which is noticeable by its difficulty in maintaining a regular frequency.¹¹

Of the total number of articles mapped in the newspaper Arte & Educação, just over half of them referred to reflections or opinions¹² on art in education, but also addressing topics related to education, the arts, literature or communication. Among its authors, those from the fields of the arts, psychology and education stood out, and its pages were filled by psychologists and education theorists such as Jean Piaget, John Dewey and Anísio Teixeira, advocates of education through art such as Viktor Lowenfeld, Herbert Read and Tom Hudson, and artists such as Henri Matisse, Paul Klee, Ziraldo and Marília Rodrigues.

Within the set of texts of a more reflexive nature, highlight is worth giving to those that made reference to the concept of creativity in order to take a stance in favor of creative education, valuing in this the dynamism of the mind and the possibility of a self-conscious development.

The concept of creativity involving art, education and psychology

The strong presence, as of the launch of the newspaper Arte & Educação, of the term creativity as one of the constituent elements of the education model defended, was combined with a new direction intended by the EAB, which was committed to incorporating in its work the contributions of science and technology, expanding investigative activities in the fields of its specialty “[...] in order to widen its range of action and insert a new dimension in its creative function” (^{Rodrigues, 1970}, p. 1). The editorial initiative sought, according to Augusto Rodrigues, “[...] to document its creative labor, socialize experiences through the dissemination of research, in addition to keeping the public informed of current education trends, inspired by the ideals of freedom and creativity, at the service of peace” (^{Rodrigues, 1970}, p. 1).

The concept of creativity and its applications to practical life had already been the object of attention, since the first decades of the 20^th century, on the part of theorists such as Lev Vygotsky, who published, in 1930, the work Imagination and Creativity in Childhood (Vygotsky, 2014). Considering intentionality as the main engine of creativity, the author defined creative activity as the producer of “[...] something new, be it a representation of an object from the outside world, be it a construction of the mind or of the feeling typical of human beings” (Vygotsky, 2014, p. 1). His reflections on the mechanisms of creative processes in human development became a reference, paving the way for other researchers (^{Coelho, 2017}).

During the 1970s, psychology was present in the educational field and in education in art. Jean Piaget, psychologist who founded Genetic Epistemology, dedicated part of his studies to the creative process in the individual¹³, focusing on its origins, causes and mechanisms. Piaget and Vygotsky had as a common horizon the conviction that creativity constitutes the cycle of human life, with its movement being integrated with the psychological activity that includes feelings, thinking, language and memory (^{Coelho, 2017}). Also in the psychology field, North American researchers such as Abraham Maslow, Joy Paul Guilford, Paul Torrance and Carl Rogers privileged creativity in their theories.

In a closer dialogue with artistic education, the concept of creativity was approached by authors such as Herbert Read and Viktor Lowenfeld. Defending the thesis that art should be the basis of education, and advocating for free artistic expression, Read devoted himself to the theme in the work entitled Education Through Art (^{Read, 1943}). The relationship between child growth and the phenomenon of creativity, in its turn, would guide Lowenfeld’s research, who published, in 1947, Development of Creative Capacity, whose Spanish version, entitled Desarrollo de la capacidad creadora (^{Lowenfeld, 1961}), circulated widely in Latin American countries. Both works would become required reading for professionals dedicated to education in art.

Following the modern trends of education through art inaugurated by Read, authors such as Arno Stern, Pierre Duquet, Jacques Depouilly and Marthe Bernson, some of whom were linked to the UNESCO, equally addressed matters related to creativity in a transversal manner in their works.

In the EAB’s context, the environment restricting freedom of expression that affected culture and politics contrasted with the intense dialogue that intellectuals linked to it had with international bodies. This enabled the debates involving art and education in which creativity was taken as a strategic element, as one can see from the program content expressed by Augusto Rodrigues in the first issue of the newspaper Arte & Educação. This factor, combined with the recurrent use of the concept on its pages, justifies his choice for the study that follows.

The selection criterion for the texts analyzed here was based on the presence of the term ‘creativity’ in their titles, with caution be taken so as to include other correlates, such as the adjective ‘creative’ and the noun ‘creation’. Initially, 23 texts were selected, to which three more were added, written by the most recurrent authors, who had the matter of ‘creativity’ as the central point of their discussions, totaling 26 articles in the end. Only three of them had no declared authorship, being thus assumed by the newspaper’s editors. There is a remarkable concentration of publications addressing the concept of creativity in 1971 and 1972, a period comprehending three quarters of all contributions, 19 in total, with the remainder being distributed more or less equally in 1970, 1974, 1975, 1976 and 1978.

Considering, based on ^{Koselleck (2006}), polysemy as a presupposition of its conceptual status, the term ‘creativity’ encompasses several elements, enclosing ‘different totalities of sense’, among which the predominant ones are ‘expression’, ‘imagination’, ‘freedom’, ‘sensibility’, ‘change’, ‘transformation’, ‘innovation’, ‘experience’, ‘authenticity’, ‘originality’, ‘intuition’ and ‘spontaneity’.

The need for greater specification as to the degree of generalization indicated by the concept approached here (^{Koselleck, 2006}) resulted, in the texts analyzed, in the use of several variants, among which the most recurrent ones were ‘creativity in education’, ‘pedagogy of creativity’, ‘creative teaching’ or ‘psychology of creativity’, relating it to the respective fields of knowledge. Another frequent attempt to restrict the meaning was the use of ‘child creativity’ to delimit the age group of interest.

Quite recurrent was the appropriation of the idea of creativity as an adjective for skills or actions, such as the pairs ‘creative capacity’, ‘creative activity’, ‘creative imagination’, ‘creative attitude’, ‘creative perspective’, ‘creative process’, ‘creative expression’, ‘creative potential’, ‘creative perception’, ‘creative impulse’ ‘creative spontaneity’, ‘creative possibility’, ‘creative manifestation’, ‘creative development’, ‘creative force’, ‘creative power’, ‘creative behavior’, ‘creative revolution’ or ‘creative practice’.

The same was true for the qualification of individuals, as in the case of ‘creative agent’, ‘creative subject’ and ‘creative teacher’, or of institutions or branches of activities, as seen in ‘creative school’, ‘creative work’, ‘creative research’ or ‘creative art’.

As for asymmetric antithetical concepts (^{Koselleck, 2006}), the idea of ‘creative education’ was approached as opposed to ‘dehumanization processes’, to ‘totalitarianism’ and to conformity with ‘pre-established standards’. It was also treated as being different in nature from a mere ‘art making’ or exercises deemed ‘non-creative’. On the other hand, a ‘school with creativity’, thought of as ‘humane’, was defined as the antidote of the ‘ordinary school’, an ‘anti-school’, ‘conservative’, ‘depersonalizing’, ‘without creativity’ and directed at ‘robots’. Finally, in the teaching-learning processes, a ‘creative child’ was compared to a ‘critical and corrective’ adult, with the ‘free creative expression’ activity of the former being ‘blocked’ and ‘disturbed’ by the repressive attitude of the latter.

The authored articles are signed by professionals from different fields of knowledge. The following stand out among them: Maria Helena Novaes Mira, a psychologist at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro [Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro] (PUC-RJ), who contributed with seven articles; Tom Hudson, British educator and artist, who had four articles published; and Durmeval Trigueiro Mendes, educator and philosopher, author of two texts. Together, they were responsible for half of all texts dealing with the theme of creativity. The other authors signed one text each, concentrating their discussions on aspects that intertwine, with different weights, the domains of art, psychology and education. From the field of the arts, the Argentine theater director Ilo Krugli, the plastic artists Augusto Rodrigues and Pierre Duquet, and the art critics Frederico Morais and Eduardo Portela addressed issues related to their specificities. The field of educational psychology, in addition to Novaes, was represented by Maria Graziela ^{Peregrino (1972}) and Elisa Dias ^{Velloso (1976}). The cast was completed by the French philosopher Alexandre ^{Koyré (1978}) and the art educators Therezinha ^{Russo (1972}) and Noêmia ^{Varela (1972}).

The Brazilian authors make up just over two thirds of the collaborators, with the foreigners being represented by Tom Hudson, Ilo Krugli, and the French Pierre Duquet and Alexandre Koyré. A link to the EAB was one of the criteria that encouraged the participation of some of the authors with texts for the newspaper Arte & Educação. This was the case of Augusto Rodrigues, the EAB’s founder and technical manager; Noêmia Varella, who had been the Institution’s technical manager and, at that time, coordinated the Art in Education Intensive Course [Curso Intensivo de Arte na Educação] (CIAE); and Maria Helena Novaes, who worked as a technical assistant at the Children’s School, with the three being members of the newspaper’s editorial board. Beyond this specific space, there was some movement in other institutions, such as the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-RJ (Novaes, Velloso and Mendes), the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro [Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro] - UFRJ (Portella), and the National Institute of Pedagogical Studies [Instituto Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos] - INEP (Novaes, Mendes and Peregrino).

Among the selected texts, some use the word ‘creativity’ and its correlates as positive qualifiers, without problematizing their sense. This is the case of the unauthored articles. The article ‘^{Valorização da criatividade no futebol brasileiro’ [Valuing Creativity in Brazilian Football] (1971}, p. 3), which deals with a photography contest entitled ‘A imagem do futebol brasileiro’ [The image of Brazilian football], does not use the term in the text, implying that football and the act of taking pictures are creative activities in themselves. In ‘^{Recanto infantil: uma experiência de educação criadora’ [Children’s Corner: An Experience of Creative Education] (1971}, p. 8-9), the interviewee Maria Cunha, a pedagogue at the educational institution ‘Children’s Corner’ [Recanto Infantil], refers to the realization of the experience of a ‘creative school’, claiming to believe that authentic education, founded on psychological and scientific principles, cannot “[...] dispense with creativity as an attitude before life [...]”, without discussing its meaning. Finally, the text ‘^{Teresa Cristina: sonho e imaginação criadora’ [Teresa Cristina: Dream and Creative Imagination] (1972}, p. 16), presenting the artist’s work with puppetry, uses the term ‘vein of creativity’, weaving relationships with the ideas of modernity, originality and liberation.

Some of the signed texts seek to enhance the experience reported or highlight the topic addressed using adjectives such as creative, as well as the very idea of creativity as an assumption and not exactly as an object of discussion. This is the case of the article entitled ‘Teatro: laboratório de criatividade’ [Theatre: Laboratory of Creativity] (^{Krugli, 1970}, p. 7-8), an interview with the artist Ilo Krugli that addresses, especially in the EAB’s context, his experience with puppetry for children and for teachers. The relationship of the experience itself with creativity is made evident when the interviewee is asked to highlight ‘the most creative experiences of his work at the Children’s School, or when he states that, in his courses, teachers participate in all of the ‘creative aspects’ of theater, and that he seeks to transform his classes into ‘real laboratories of creativity’ by developing ‘sensibility’ and ‘creative imagination’. A similar procedure is used in the essay entitled ‘A imaginação criadora na Renascença/Paracelso’ [Creative Imagination in the Renaissance/Paracelsus], in which ^{Koyré (1978}) analyzes the ideas of the Renaissance thinker Paracelsus from the principle that every creative or productive action is magical.

Likewise, Frederico Morais, when addressing the event ‘Domingo da Criação’ [Creation Sunday], held monthly for the spontaneous public by the Museum of Modern Art in Rio de Janeiro [Museu de Arte Moderna do Rio de Janeiro] (MAM-Rio), defines it as “[...] manifestations of free creativity with new materials” (Morais, 1971, p. 7), individually and collectively. The author also points out the democratic character of the creative experience:

Creation no longer belongs to a class; it does not reside only in studios or schools. You can create in the street, outside the museum, modestly. The aura, the mystery, the distancing is over, the art has fallen from its pedestal, onto the ground, onto the earth. [...] If the museum is now the city, the studio is any place where some men (teachers or students) willing to create gather, and the material is what is under our feet, in our body, in our mind (^{Morais 1971}, p. 7).

In their essays, some of the studied authors related creativity to broad themes, such as the texts entitled ‘É a liberdade um ato de criação?’ [Is Freedom an Act of Creation?] (^{Russo, 1972}, p. 14) and ‘Criatividade, trabalho e lazer’ [Creativity, Work and Leisure], a transcript of a lecture given by Eduardo ^{Portella (1975}) at the EAB. Russo defends the thesis that the act of freedom is, as a process, an act of creation. For Portella, on the other hand, work is fundamentally a creative enterprise, “[...] the most radical of all, because it is in work that man ‘creates’ himself” (Portella, 1975, p. 7, author’s emphasis). In his opinion, the natural universe of creativity would be the harmonious and solidary relationship between education, work and leisure, the basis of a desirable cultural policy.

A significant number of texts published on the subject took a more careful look at the concept of creativity as a component of educational and psychological processes, bringing a variety of issues to the discussion. The text entitled ‘Criatividade na escola’ [Creativity at School], by Pierre ^{Duquet (1971}, p. 3), relates creative capacity to the exercise of playing for children, suggesting one to think about the school in a context in which everything would articulate “[...] in a big game that evolves throughout the year, including creative activities in all domains”. The child, by forging their tools, would learn while creating. Drawing and painting would be, in his opinion, creative activities and would express mental development (Duquet, 1971). Augusto Rodrigues, for his part, in ‘Educação criadora: preparação para a paz’ [Creative Education: Preparation for Peace], addresses a topic very dear to the UNESCO, an institution that celebrated its 25^th anniversary that year. Defending art as a unifying force for understanding among men, and ‘creative education’ as the main ‘front of the fight for peace’, he claims that it is the educator’s “[...] the exceptional task of preserving peace [...]”, which would happen “[...] through the dynamics of a creative process” (Rodrigues, 1971, p. 7).

Nevertheless, it is in the texts by Noêmia Varela, Maria Graziela Peregrino, Elisa Dias Velloso, Durmeval Trigueiro Mendes, Maria Helena Novaes and Tom Hudson that the debate on creativity stands out in greater depth, encompassing reflections on the concept itself and matters such as relations between pure and applied arts, teacher training and child development, among others. Due to the number of contributions and the relevance of the arguments, Mendes, Novaes and Hudson will deserve a greater attention from us.

With a degree in Philosophy, Classical Languages and Law, Trigueiro Mendes (1927-1987) had been the Secretary of Education and Culture of the State of Paraíba, having collaborated with institutions such as the INEP, UNESCO and CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel). He also worked at the State University of Paraíba [Universidade Estadual da Paraíba], at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and on the CAPES’ advisory board, being, at the time, a professor at the PUC-RJ (^{Fávero & Fávero, 2010}).

Undertaking a philosophy-based discussion, Trigueiro Mendes participated in the newspaper Arte & Educação with an article entitled ‘Criatividade, experiência e educação’ [Creativity, Experience and Education] (^{Mendes, 1971}a, ^{Mendes, 1971}b), in two parts. Dialoguing with authors from philosophy and from other fields of knowledge¹⁴, he sees creativity as a result of practical activities: “Doing is the experience that returns from perception and materializes in creation. Perception, realization (that is, reduction of the universe to the individual realm) and expression, this is the course of the creative process - in art and in education” (^{Mendes, 1971}a, p. 5). For him, pedagogy would be the freedom to look, while imagination would be the barn of creation, in a process in which perception would play a decisive role.

His formulation of the concept of creativity starts from a comprehensive perspective, coinciding with the educational process.

In short, we can say that education is, philosophically and sociologically, creativity, and that the latter is a process in which the following concepts are fundamentally involved: a) that of assumed existence; b) that of imagination as the force by which existence assumes objects, assuming itself, changing them and changing itself; c) that of ‘experiential level’, as the line of integration between the outside, the objective, being and doing; d) that of doing, as a craft of the operative consciousness; e) that of the dialectic between acting and doing (^{Mendes, 1971}a, p. 5, author’s emphasis).

Opposing the idea of creativity as the artist’s prerogative, the author considers that it is not a specialization, but part of the human condition, needing to be protected at all levels and in all modalities of education. Art would not have, as a creative process, the privilege of exclusivity, but of exemplarity. The role of art in education would then be that of “[...] setting, in a concrete manner, the value of the individual as a primary source of creativity” (^{Mendes, 1971}b, p. 6). This would not mean, however, a necessary opposition between societal processes and the creative process, centered on the individual, with a conciliation between the two dimensions being desirable. Finally, it would be up to the ‘pedagogy of creativity’ to develop a new pattern of sociability, achieved by redefining the role of the individual in society.

The effort to conceptualize the term ‘creativity’ was also the object of attention of the psychologist and educator Maria Helena Novaes (1926-2012), already a reference in the field of school psychology nationwide at that time. Having studied in the 1950s at the Universities of Geneva and Paris V, Novaes had the opportunity to work with some prominent names in developmental psychology, such as Bärbel Inhelder and Jean Piaget. She also took specialization courses and internships in Brazil, Europe, the United States and Canada, being granted scholarships abroad from institutions such as the UNESCO, the National Research Council [Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa] (CNPq), the British Council and the Ford Foundation. Her dedication to teaching and research at the PUC-RJ, since the 1960s (^{Nicolaci-da-Costa, 2019}), resulted, back then, in the production of the works Psicologia escolar [School Psychology] (^{Novaes, 1970}a) and Psicologia da criatividade [Psychology of Creativity] (^{Novaes, 1971}a).

The defense of creative education and of creativity is central in the work that has said concept in its title, which is discussed in a broad way by the author in an intense dialogue with authors, studies and theories. Novaes, initially, criticizes the use of the expression ‘creativity’, which, due to its strong attraction, would be serving to represent the new and the original, without proper scientific comprehension. Etymologically, the author notes that creativity is linked to the term ‘to create’, that is, “[...] to give rise to, to come out of nothing, to establish relationships not yet established by the individual’s universe, aiming at certain purposes” (^{Novaes, 1971}a, p. 17). According to her, the different definitions of creativity could fit into four categories, related as follows:

[...] ‘to the person who creates’, emphasizing aspects concerning temperament, traits, values, emotional attitudes; ‘to the creative process’, highlighting creative thinking, motivations, perception; ‘to the product created’, analyzing inventions, artistic works or scientific innovations; and to ‘environmental influences’, emphasizing educational, social and cultural conditioning (^{Novaes, 1971}a, p. 17, author’s emphasis).

From this, there is a certain concentration of analysis of creativity under the psychological aspect and not so much on the result of the artistic production itself.

In the newspaper Arte & Educação, the theme was explored by Novaes in several ways. In the first two texts published (^{Novaes, 1970}b, p. 9; ^{Novaes, 1971}b, p. 14-15), the central theme was the EAB’s participation in the Conference held by the INSEA, in Conventry, England, in August 1970, with the matter of creativity being approached in parallel. The first one presented the transcript of a lecture given by the author on the occasion about the Children’s School’s teacher training course, mentioning several times the matter of creativity, taken as strategic for the teaching practice. Creative activities, considered as the product of an interaction between people and the environment, were judged by her as responsible for allowing “[...] the individual to make progress on their own, in a conscious manner, in a unique learning style” (^{Novaes, 1970}b, p. 9). Novaes also stated that teachers “[...] should be prepared to become flexible, creative and innovative in schools, to stimulate individuals for creative activities [...]” and highlighted, in the program of the course, the presence of “[...] group sessions related to the process of creativity in its social, psychological and educational aspects” (^{Novaes, 1970}b, p. 9).

In the second text, the reader had access to a summary of the activities carried out on the day that was especially dedicated to the study of Creativity and Technology. Considering this as one of the highlights of the Conference, Novaes explored the ideas of authors such as Tom Hudson and Margareth Naumburg on the importance of creativity in education, stressing the role of psychology in analyzing creative processes for art and education. Some ‘certainties’ related to the idea of creativity and reinforced by the event were pointed out by her.

That creative behavior can only be analyzed within the category of integrative behaviors, since we feel, think, act, create as a whole; [...] that the creative dimension must be inherent to the educational process, leading individuals not only to learn to make new associations in order to integrate objects in a creative process, but also to know how to manipulate creatively in order to activate their minds and discover new mental potentials (^{Novaes, 1971}b, p. 15).

On two other occasions, the idea of creativity was used to support reflections on specific problems. In the text entitled ‘Sentido universal da criatividade’ [Universal Sense of Creativity] (^{Novaes, 1972}), creative human activities were analyzed historically from relationships with the sociocultural environment. The same happened with an article that dealt with creativity as an integral part of cognitive development in the context of pre-school education (^{Novaes, 1976}).

The concept of creativity and its consequences in education were explored by Novaes with greater depth in three texts published between 1971 and 1974 (^{Novaes, 1971}c, ¹⁹⁷¹d, ¹⁹⁷⁴). The expression ‘creativity’ was critically analyzed from researchers in the psychology field such as Barron, Guilford, Westcott and Leary, and topics referring to the creative dimension in the educational process were developed. Despite differences between product-creativity and process-creativity, ^{Novaes (1971}c) notes that a creative product may not always be the result of a particular way in which an individual perceives the world. Creative attitudes, in their turn, are not necessarily related to original products or creativity activities, though this usually occurs in practice.

An education with a creative sense should, in her opinion,

[...] favor the mobilization of individuals’ creative potential, not only promoting creativity activities aimed at pre-established products but, above all, internal attitudes of creation, stimulating transformation, in addition to reassessing ideas and concepts, inventiveness, curiosity and a spirit of research (^{Novaes, 1971}c, p. 8)

^{Novaes (1971}d, p. 7) warns that the creative process would be logically “[...] dependent on the means that make it possible, on acquired experiences, and on the array of information obtained”. Only then, in the establishment of new and original relations, one would be able to create, and it is important to provide students with an environment that would induce them to externalize the richness of images formed by their minds to encourage free and spontaneous expression. The creative dimension would be intrinsic to the educational process, bearing in mind that “[...] creativity is a force that is distributed throughout society, being essential for its development, and should not be stunted by the social pressures themselves” (^{Novaes, 1971}d, p. 7). What would sustain this process of creative education would be, in addition to the use of cognitive strategies, the conditioning of attitudes towards new experiences, selective perception, and attention directing. Although the term ‘conditioning’ seems somewhat dissonant from the idea of creativity, there was a perception of the need for a change of perspective in the educational sphere, requiring a series of strategies to sensitize the individual to more innovative aspects.

Reinforcing important aspects of a creative education, ^{Novaes (1974}) equally drew attention to what she referred to as mistakes made in the appropriation of the idea of creative education: interpreting ‘creative education’ as ‘idealized solution to all educational problems’; considering creativity as a fad; confusing the efficiency of creative teaching with excessive production of works in different fields of artistic activities; disrespecting one’s own styles of creative expression by imposing stereotyped standards of action on students; exploring creative techniques without analyzing their objectives and controlling their effects on school behaviors; and not knowing the importance of creative education in the comprehensive formation of personality (^{Novaes, 1974}). The recognition of such mistakes would be, in her opinion, opportune to better situate the Art and Education movement and encourage creative behavior in schools, developing aesthetic sensibility and artistic perception.

The relationships established by ^{Novaes and other EAB participants at the 1970} INSEA Conference resulted in the English artist and professor Tom Hudson (1922-1997) becoming closer to the Brazilian institution, which invited him to the celebrations of its 23^rd anniversary and, consequently, to collaborate with the newspaper Arte & Educação. An artist, professor and researcher of child aesthetic development, Hudson had taught at the Leeds College of Art between 1950 and 1960. Having acted as a UNESCO consultant and an advisor to the Brazilian government on matters involving education and art, at that time he held the post of Director of Studies at the Cardiff College of Art.

His visit to Brazil was made possible by an agreement between the EAB, the Museum of Modern Art in Rio de Janeiro and some Brazilian universities. Courses were planned in Rio de Janeiro and in other cities such as Curitiba; the first two, held at the EAB, were about creative education, with one of them aimed at teachers of children and pre-adolescents, and the other, at teachers of adolescents in normal and elementary schools (^{Tom Hudson..., 1971}, p. 4).

Hudson’s contributions to the newspaper Arte & Educação, concentrated in the years 1971 and 1972 (^{Hudson, 1971}a; ^{Hudson, 1971}b; ^{Hudson 1971}c; ^{Hudson, 1972}), addressed the matter of creativity in a more pragmatic way, emphasizing its relationships with art and technology. His assumption is that creative processes are not a prerogative of the so-called ‘pure art’, equally integrating what was conventionally called ‘applied art’. For him, such processes “[...] arise from all aspects of sensibility, including the intuitive and the intellectual ones” (^{Hudson, 1971}a, p. 13), and should be the main axis of the educational debate on art. In his opinion, creative education should encompass the training of more technical professionals, such as engineers, with a desirable integration, for instance, of a work involving art, design and architecture students.

Rejecting the idea of subjecting man to machines or computers, Tom Hudson advocates that they should be thought of as allies of man, contributing to enhancing his creative intelligence. To this end, it would be necessary to overcome the fear of technology through an “[...] emotional security that emerges from individual creative development”. If, on the one hand, the computer had great capacity for logical processes, on the other, it was incapable of reproducing human processes, such as “[...] inventive and creative capacity, for spontaneous reaction and instinctive production” (^{Hudson, 1971}b, p. 7).

In his opinion, education should enable people to design ‘machines they have never seen or used’. For a creative education, it was necessary to free people from the various shackles of technology, which required intensive training.

By effectively programming information into our own processes, we can find topological solutions to problems, rather than just using the laborious ‘learning by doing’ and trial-and-error methods. [...] in education, it is necessary to free people from the inhibiting aspects of formal technology - and this can only be done by freeing the mind, by training adaptability, instant response, processes of immediacy, simultaneity of action and thought, what we can call immediacy technology or instant processes (^{Hudson, 1971}b, p. 7, author’s emphasis).

The autonomy of man in an automated world would depend on the development of mental processes made possible by expanded creative capacity. Contrarily to the excessive valuation of spontaneity and to the expressionist tendency in art education, when referring specifically to secondary school in his last article published in Arte & Educação, Hudson made clear the assumptions he deemed essential for a creative education, which transcend ‘art making’ to cover other realms of existence. According to him, access to a more creative way of life should be a right for everyone, not just for those supposedly talented or gifted with artistic inclinations.

Creative ability, considered innate by Hudson, should be stimulated along with sensibility and the other capacities, and the development of individual creative capacity would necessarily occur concomitantly with collective creative attitude. Teaching, in general, should and could be thought of as a creative process, and should be “[...] sufficiently open to be self-critical, self-generating and revitalizing” (^{Hudson, 1972}, p. 7). Defending methodological plurality, Hudson finally states that there is no single path to creative education, just as there is no single way of being a creator.