MARIA HELENA NOVAES: REFLECTIONS ON CREATIVITY BETWEEN PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, AND ART (1970s)

INTRODUCTION

Psychology, like philosophy and sociology, played a significant role in the formation of the educational field, being a science in Brazil from the first decades of the republican period. Here we seek to analyze the career of psychologist Maria Helena Novaes and her relationships with the art education projects discussed in Brazil in the 1970s. In addition to aspects of her biography and her fields of activity, we will discuss her productions related to the role of art in the educational context and creativity as an essential element for the good psychological development of the individual.

As Giovani Levi (1996, p. 176) points out, biographical analyses should always be interpreted “[...] based on a context that makes them possible [...]”, and it is necessary and desirable to seek a balance between the “[...] specificity of the individual trajectory and the social system as a whole”. In this sense, we consider that biography, beyond its linear and factual aspects, can be taken as an instrument of historical knowledge, making it possible to glimpse aspects of interest in the social and educational fields from an individual point of view. Therefore, we adopt the idea of trajectory as “[...] a series of positions successively occupied by the same agent [...] in a space that is becoming, subject to constant transformations” (Bourdieu, 1996, p. 189), always thinking of our character in the social landscape of which he was a part.

In the 19th century, changes in capitalist production processes generated the need for responses to the resulting social demands. According to Antunes (2012, p. 51), “[...] effective knowledge was needed to better understand such problems and intervene in them, seeking to control them, especially over human behavior”. The author cites technical advances, the social division of labor, and the consequent tendency towards specialization as conditions for psychology to establish as a specific area of ​​knowledge. On the other hand, the progress of philosophy and physiology, in their convergence towards a possible synthesis, can be considered co-responsible for the formation of what would be more appropriately conceptualized as a psychological phenomenon.

According to Patto (2022), the origins of psychology focused on education are confused with the establishment of scientific psychology. The need for qualified labor for the industry, which required specific skills and certain personality characteristics, drove the development of psychology that aimed to “[...] provide ‘scientific’ concepts and instruments of measurement [...]” (Patto, 2022, p. 142) and that guaranteed the conformation of individuals to the new work context through selection and guidance procedures, whether in the workplace or at school.

The historiography on the subject considers the research carried out in 1884 by Francis Galton in his psychometric laboratory linked to University College, London, to be pioneering. Seeking to improve the so-called most capable individuals, he created parameters for measuring intelligence and personality, which can be considered precursors of the scales and tests that became hegemonic in diagnosing psychologists in schools and factories. These efforts were joined by those of Binet and Simon, who, in 1905, constructed the first metric scale of children's intelligence (Patto, 2022).

In the Brazilian context of the 19th century, the political autonomy enjoyed after 1822 facilitated contact with ideas circulating in European countries, which included knowledge related to psychology. In the last decades of the century, research in France, Germany, Russia, and the United States, outlined from different theoretical perspectives, expanded the possibilities for intervention. Such approaches reached the country through Brazilians who went to study or improve their skills in Europe and foreigners who came to Brazil to share their knowledge through courses, conferences, and consultancy (Antunes, 2012). Thus, the psychological knowledge produced in Brazil during this period was mainly linked to the fields of medicine and education, before moving towards the establishment of psychology as a specific area, as was already occurring in Europe and the United States.

In the medicine field, theses with a psychological focus were developed in the faculties of Rio de Janeiro and Bahia, many of them aiming at the normalization and sanitization of society. Other texts defending similar ideas, with psychology as the dominant axis, were produced by doctors and published in books, magazine articles, or newspapers (Antunes, 2012).

Patto (2022) divides the trajectory of psychology in Brazil in the 20th century into three basic moments, especially in its relations with the educational field. The first moment lasted until the 1930s and was marked by research in laboratories attached to schools or extracurricular institutions. As an example, we can mention the creation of the first psychology laboratory in Brazil in 1906, linked to the Pedagogium, a pedagogical museum founded in Rio de Janeiro in 1890². The renewal movements in education, defending a scientific pedagogy, had psychology as one of their basic elements. According to Bencostta and Walger (2015, p. 122), during this period there was already an attempt in Brazil to institutionalize this knowledge with the “[...] creation of experimental psychology laboratories in hospitals and, mainly, in normal schools [...]”, within which the chair called Pedagogy and Psychology was created. As a result, compendiums were produced, and specialized works were published on the subject, some were translations of foreign authors. The first books on tests were published in the 1920s, some by authors linked to the educational reforms underway, such as Isaías Alves and Lourenço Filho. The latter, concerned with measuring the behavior of students who had failed a grade, organized a series of psychological tests, called the ABC Tests (Nunes, 1998).

[...] at this time, the testing movement began in Brazil, used essentially as instruments for rationalizing educational practice (along with the general rationalization movement, defended mainly as a condition for industrial implementation and development), and which lasted for decades (Antunes, 2012, p. 54).

The second period, between 1930 and 1960, was characterized by the practice of diagnosis and treatment, through tests directed at some individuals from the school population to select those most suitable for entering school or progressing at its different levels (Patto, 2022). This was a time of great relevance for the development and consolidation of psychology as a science and profession, with consequences in “[...] teaching, application, production of studies and research, publications, organization of scientific events and organization in scientific and professional associations” (Antunes, 2006, p. 91). One of its characteristics was the expansion of psychology teaching from normal schools to higher education, especially in philosophy and pedagogy courses, as well as the increase in the fields of activity of psychology, which, from education, extended to the organization of work and clinical practice. The National Institute of Pedagogical Studies (Inep-Instituto Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos) was one of the public institutions that contributed to the development and dissemination of Educational Psychology, through the offering of internships and improvement courses for Psychology teachers and educators in general, applied Psychology services and educational measurements, in addition to the Revista Brasileira de Estudos Pedagógicos, a source for the dissemination of research and studies (Antunes, 2012).

Finally, the third period, from 1960 onwards and in which Maria Helena Novaes is included, would see psychology practiced in schools more extensively, directly or indirectly reaching a larger portion of the school population. The previous movements created conditions for the recognition of the profession of psychology in 1962, consolidating its practical practice modalities through Law 4,119/1962. This contributed to the creation of many higher education courses in the 1970s as a response to the demand for training in the area and evidence of a growing interest in psychology (Antunes, 2012, p. 60).

It is important to note that although the conceptual meanings of Educational Psychology and School Psychology are intrinsically intertwined, they have distinct meanings. The author understands the former as “[...] one of the scientific foundations of Education and pedagogical practice [...]”, while the latter as “[...] a modality of professional activity that has the school process as its field of action, focusing on the relationships that are established in the school and its correlates” (Antunes, 2011, p. 11). In these two dimensions, relationships with another field - than art - have been established over time.

The interest in the role of art in education, which has been recurrent in the last two centuries and has been expressed by educators, intellectuals, psychologists, and artists, as well as its close relationship with the phenomenon of modernity, was problematized by Donna Kelly (2004) based on three different paradigms, which, far from being watertight, have often been confused in the different actions and reflections on the subject. The first of these defended the importance of learning to draw to meet the demand for qualified labor for industry, and resulted, in the 19th century, in the dissemination of the model of arts and crafts schools, as well as the inclusion of the subject of drawing in school curricula. The second paradigm, called by the author the Aesthetic Window, was supported by artists, critics, art historians, philosophers, and educators who were interested in children's artistic production for its formal and artistic qualities, valuing individual expression and originality. Alongside these and chronologically before the aesthetic paradigm, the Psychological Mirror paradigm, of interest to this research because it comes from the field of psychology, saw spontaneous children's graphic production as an instrument for understanding the child's mind, conceived as a reflective surface not only of its various stages of development but also of its cognitive functions. Intellectuals such as James Sully, Corrado Ricci, Georg Kerschensteiner, and Georges Rouma are considered pioneers of this trend, emphasizing the process of drawing, its planning, and execution, to the detriment of the finished product. Their research emphasized both the individual monitoring of children and larger groups, resulting in categorizations and systematization of diagnostic tests (Kelly, 2004).

Throughout the 20th century, the last two paradigms spread considerably and often in an articulated manner, influencing the work of educators and art theorists such as Franz Cizek, Marion Richardson, Herbert Read, and Viktor Lowenfeld, among many others. In the Brazilian context, they manifested as early as the 1920s, in experiments with children by artists such as Anita Malfatti and Mário de Andrade. Art played a decisive role in educational forms such as those undertaken in the Federal District (1927-1929) by Anísio Teixeira, in Minas Gerais (1928) by Francisco Campos, and in Pernambuco (1928) by Carneiro Leão, driven by the Escola Nova movement, especially based on the dialogue with the thought of John Dewey (Barbosa, 2001). Entitled Psychology of Children's Drawing, the work of Sylvio Rabello (1935) is a pioneer in the systematization of research with children from Pernambuco based on drawings.

Children's art exhibitions, such as the drawings by British students, organized by Herbert Read and held at the National Museum of Fine Arts in 1941 (Osinski, 2019), and educational projects such as the Escolinha de Arte do Brasil, created in 1948 by Augusto Rodrigues, are examples of numerous initiatives that were part of the cultural landscape in which Maria Helena Novaes found herself immersed. Such actions ended up, in some way, contributing to the formation of her educational thinking, which, intertwining issues related to art and psychology, had creativity as one of its central elements.

NOTES ON A CAREER FOCUSED ON PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION AND ART

Known to those closest to her as Malena, Maria Helena Novaes (1926-2012) was born in Rio de Janeiro and lived in São Paulo between the ages of 7 and 15 (Bertoni, 2012). According to Alencar (2020), her parents were from Portugal and had considerable purchasing power, which allowed her to develop in an economically favorable environment and facilitated her contact with the world of culture, of which works of art were part.

At a very young age, at 16, Novaes entered the College of Philosophy, Sciences and Arts of the Universidade Santa Úrsula, in Rio de Janeiro, graduating in Neo-Latin Arts in 1946, at the age of 19 (Motta, 1999). Her interest in art, history, archaeology, and culture led her to attend the Museum Course - Historical and Artistic at the same time. While taking the Didactics course, she had her first contact with the study of psychology, as she comments: “From then on I tried to systematize this knowledge, since at that time there was still no specific course for the training of psychologists” (Novaes, 1997, p. 83).

After completing her studies in the mid-1940s, Novaes decided to spend six months in Europe to visit museums, art centers, and various exhibitions in countries such as Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, and Switzerland. At the time, he was able to deepen her newly acquired knowledge in the field of art, as well as practice languages she had previously mastered, such as French, English, and Spanish. Upon returning to Brazil, she enrolled in the newly created Occupational Therapy specialization course, promoted by the Brazilian Education Association (ABE-Associação Brasileira de Educação), gaining experience in rehabilitation and expanding her knowledge in anatomy, biology, and psychology, as well as in practice in the field of rehabilitation (Vasconcellos, 2022). In the end, she complemented this training by interning in hospitals in Rio de Janeiro and visiting training centers for rehabilitation technicians in the United States and Canada.

Maria Helena Novaes' interest in the field of psychology, which had been evident since her early studies and gradually became part of her career, led her to seek out the Instituto de Seleção e Orientação (Selection and Orientation Institute) at Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV, which Emílio Myra y Lopez then headed. The institution was considered a reference center for studies, research, and practices in the field of Applied Psychology, and it was there that she began her professional career.

Admitted in 1952, after a probationary period, I worked in the area of ​​diagnosis, school, and professional guidance, doing various research; attending numerous courses, taught there, on general psychology, psychological examination techniques, evolutionary and differential psychology, psychotherapies, statistics and research methods (Novaes, 1997, p. 2).

A few decades later, she reflected on the reasons for her choices:

The choice of Psychology as a professional field resulted from a series of factors; however, the most decisive was having found in this science the possibility of better understanding human beings and being able to help and guide them in a safer and more effective way. On the other hand, my motivation for creative and cultural activities also led to the need for a psychological focus on the creative process (Novaes, 1997, p. 1).

Novaes also completed several specializations and internships in Brazil, Canada, Europe, and the United States (Federal Council of Psychology, 2004), winning scholarships at internationally recognized institutions. In 1956, she received a scholarship from the British Council to do an internship in England, where the activities focused on professional rehabilitation for young people and adults, which took place in re-education and professional training centers. According to her, her goal was to improve her skills so that, upon returning to Brazil, she could join the founding team of the Brazilian Charitable Rehabilitation Association (ABBR-Associação Brasileira Beneficente de Reabilitação ), to which she was linked for over twenty years. In addition to organizing and coordinating the Psychology Service, she taught psychology classes at the School for Training Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists (Novaes, 1997).

Three years later, in 1959, another scholarship, this time granted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization - UNESCO through the Ministry of Education and Culture - MEC, took her to the University of Geneva and the Jean Jacques Rousseau Institute, where she was able to participate in the research of Jean Piaget, Bärbel Inhelder, André Rey and Robert Dottrens (Novaes, 1997). This training was complemented in 1960 when she also completed a subsidized internship at the University of Paris X, supervised by René and Bianka Zazzo.

I visited, both in Switzerland and in France, language and psychomotor reeducation centers, special schools, medical-psychopedagogical services, psychological clinics, and other community resources in the field of formal, informal, regular or special education (Novaes, 1997, p. 2).

In 1960, Maria Helena Novaes began teaching and researching at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ, and at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-RJ (PUC-Rio, [undated]). In 1967, her work with a battery of Educational Development tests developed and standardized in Brazil as part of an international project by the Ford Foundation at FGV resulted in her winning a travel grant offered by that institution to interning at the Educational Testing Service in Princeton, in the United States. She had the opportunity to get in touch with several other universities, such as those in Chicago, San Francisco, Berkeley and New York, as well as research centers specializing in psychological tests. At the time, she made important contacts with several psychologists and researchers, such as Anne Anastasi, Lee Cronbach, Carl Rogers, among others, who provided important support for the project. At this time, Novaes introduced the chair of School Psychology and Learning Problems in the Psychology course at PUC-RJ (Novaes, 1997).

In 1968, she completed her doctorate in Psychology at PUC-RJ with the title Creativity with Children (A Criatividade com Crianças), under the supervision of Haroldo Rodrigues (Vasconcellos, 2022). A few years later, in 1974, she defended a thesis for a free professorship at UFRJ, entitled Adaptive Modalities of School Behaviors (Modalidades Adaptativas dos Comportamentos Escolares). In 1978, she took postdoctoral courses and internships with a CNPq scholarship in Switzerland, at the Center for Genetic Epistemology in Geneva, with Jean Piaget, and the Laboratory of Child Psychobiology at the University of Paris V, with René Zazzo, that in her opinion, contributed to a professional renewal (Novaes, 1997).

As an extension of her professional experience, she participated in the ABBR foundation, where she started a Psychology and Guidance service and worked as a professor in the Physical Therapy and Occupational Therapy courses. Another action in which she took part was the creation, in 1957, of the Psychopedagogical Guidance Service at the Guatemala School, an experimental educational institution linked to INEP, where she worked with the educator Anísio Teixeira. Working with a multidisciplinary team, she dedicated herself to research and psychological diagnosis, to the guidance of teacher and the supervision of psychology interns. On the other hand, her experience at the Youth Guidance Center of the Ministry of Health, where she worked from 1968 onwards, resulted in the deepening of psychological diagnosis techniques for adolescents with school adaptation problem, and in the carrying out of research with batteries of tests (Novaes, 1997).

She also contributed to create the Center for Psychological and Educational Tests and the Brazilian Association for Gifted Children - ABSD (Associação Brasileira para Superdotados) having presided over it for two years (PUC-Rio, [undated]). The results of this intense work were published in several articles in the Brazilian Archives of Applied Psychology (Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia Aplicada). Novaes was also responsible for developing a line of research focused on school diagnosis and prognosis, unprecedented in the country until then, and was a pioneer in the study of creativity and giftedness. She also produced a glossary of psychological terms and organized the book Tests and Measures in Education (Testes e Medidas em Educação).

His dedication to psychology in the school environment was quite significant, contributing to the dissemination and validation of the area for education. In her view:

There is no doubt that psychology's contribution to education is not only valuable but also necessary, given its evident influence on the methodological renewal of teaching processes and curricular organization, and can provide theoretical-scientific support that enables the improvement of teaching techniques and methods and enables the development of the potential of students, teachers, and other agents in the educational process (Novaes, 1977, p. 9).

According to Vasconcellos (2022), the investment in psychology and the option for this training did not make Novaes put the role of educator in the background, dedicating her professional career “[...] to the search for alternatives that reconcile research with a pedagogical practice consistent with her scientific production” (Vasconcellos, 2022, [n.p.]).

The close ties maintained with art justify her effective participation in the projects of the Escolinha de Arte do Brasil - EAB, where she worked as a teacher and technical advisor to Augusto Rodrigues, Zoé Noronha and Noêmia Varela, having represented the entity in two international congresses of the International Society for Education Through Art - Insea³, in Montreal, Canada, in 1963, and in Coventry, England, in 1970. She was also an active member of the Brazilian Society of Education through Art - Sobrearte, linked to the EAB.

The continuous attempt to integrate theory and practice was one of the main characteristics of her professional career. Much of this effort was recorded in classes taught, scientific articles, newspaper articles, and books, revealing significant productivity (Motta, 1999). Her contribution was so expressive that in her honor the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Capes (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) dedicated a page on the memorial portal to her as one of the pioneers of science in Brazil (Vasconcellos, 2022). The more specific aspects of this intended improvement of techniques and development of students' potential, especially in art education and its relations with creativity, will be addressed below.

In the context of the 1970s, with a strong political repression as a result of the civil-military dictatorship⁴, the works of her authorship that will be the object of our attention here took place, Psicologia Escolar (Novaes, 1970b) e Psicologia da Criatividade⁵ (Novaes, 1971d). Some of the chapters of the latter were also discussed by the author and published in the EAB journal Arte & Educação in 1970 and 1971.

Aimed at psychologists working in schools, pedagogues, educational counselors, teachers, and students in the education and psychology area, Psicologia Escolar (Novaes, 1970b) was proposed as a manual with contents that included an overview of psychology in the context of the modern school, covering the training and duties of the school psychologist, the use of tests in schools, evolutionary stages and the educational process, and focusing on some specific problems and themes in the interfaces between psychology and education. Its last chapter Criatividade e Educação, already contained the theme that would occupy her attention throughout the 1970s. The contents addressed there, such as the analysis of creative activity, the importance of free expression, and creative activities in the educational process, would be revisited and deepened in the work she would publish the following year (Novaes, 1971d), as we will see later.

CREATIVITY AS AN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION

At the interfaces between the psychology, education, and art fields, creativity has occupied the concerns of theorists since the first decades of the 20th century. In a work published in 1930, Vygotsky (2014) already chose creative activity as a central theme, reflecting on the mechanisms of the creative processes in human development. Similarly, in the 1940s, authors such as Herbert Read (1943) and Viktor Lowenfeld (1961), supporters of the ideal of freedom of artistic expression for children, dedicated to reflecting on the creative processes in their works, becoming references for professionals linked to art education.

In the 1970s, the search for the development of creativity crossed several fields of knowledge, especially psychology. As a founder of Genetic Epistemology, Jean Piaget (2001) dedicated part of his studies to the origins, causes, and mechanisms of the creative process. North American researchers such as Abraham Maslow, Joy Paul Guilford, Paul Torrance, and Carl Rogers privileged creativity in their theories, adopted by Novaes (1971d; 1977) as references for the solidification of the concept, focused especially on art education.

In the Brazilian context, since the mid-1960s, publications on the subject have been reaching Brazilian bookstores with a wide variety of approaches. Translations by authors such as Von Fange (1961), Taylor (1964) and Kneller (1965) explored issues related to creativity from a professional perspective, its potential for progress or its relations with art and science. In the following decade, translations of foreign authors intensified, such as the works of Prince (1970), Rouquette (1973) and Von Fange (1971). This movement encouraged Brazilian authors to also take a stance on the subject, such as Figueiredo (1974), who discussed the subject more broadly, Leite (1975), who investigated the developments of creativity in the field of theater, and Ostrower (1977), whose reflections focused on creative processes.

The debate on creativity is very broad and has often extended to the educational environment. Examples include the translation of Beaudot's work (1975), which addressed creativity in the school environment, and the publication by Marin (1976), which focused on reflecting on the interfaces between education, art, and creativity. Japiassu (2001) highlights the relationships between the role of creativity in school education and the processes of mass education that characterized the democratization of secular education throughout the 20th century. According to the author, the requirement for training specific labor for diverse demands contributed to creativity becoming part of the scope of formal education, given the industrialization of goods, the growing competition between companies in the sector, the technological development of equipment, and the need to improve design and products.

During this period, EAB was strongly involved in these ideas in its activities, especially in its teacher training courses, to reach teachers and students in schools. Founded in 1948 in Rio de Janeiro by artist and educator Augusto Rodrigues, EAB was an institution that offered children and adolescents methods that would enable them to develop their creative abilities, without requiring attendance or performance assessments. The assumptions it defended were closely related to modern trends in art education, which dialogued with the fields of psychology and pedagogy, affirming the importance of art in educational processes and children's free expression.

In the defense of creativity in education, the field of psychology had an important contribution to the work of Maria Helena Novaes. Her reflections on the concept in the 1970s occurred at a time when she was already considered a national reference in the field of School Psychology.

An important milestone in the analysis and discussion of creativity in arts education, and consequently in disseminating the concept, was the 20th Insea World Congress, held in 1970 in England. As a representative of the EAB, Maria Helena Novaes participated in the event alongside the director of the EAB, Zoé Chagas Freitas, establishing important relationships with educators who at the time were rethinking art education, such as Tom Hudson (1922-1997), considered a key figure in the Basic Design movement and who revolutionized art education in Great Britain in the 1950s and 1960s (Santini, 2021, p. 150). The artist and professor had been working since 1964 as director of the Cardiff College of Art, in Cardiff, the capital of Wales, seeking a radical interaction between art and education (YSP, 2013). Very impressed by his experimental and innovative ideas on art and design education, Zoé Chagas Freitas invited him to give lectures in Brazil (Hudson, 1971b, p. 7)⁶.

The relationship between EAB and Hudson⁷ regarding the concept of creativity intensified with his visit to Brazil to give a lecture on the theme of Creative Technology (Tom Hudson vem ensinar criatividade na educação, 1971, p. 4) and to teach a course on Creative Education, offered by EAB in celebration of its 23rd anniversary, for primary school teachers from August 2 to 6, 1971, and for secondary school teachers from August 9 to 13 of the same year. His ideas and work in Brazil are important for reflecting on the interconnections between art, education, and psychology in the work of Maria Helena Novaes.

As a technical consultant for the EAB, Maria Helena Novaes also taught courses on the Psychology of Creativity and disseminated her ideas in the journal Arte & Educação⁸ (1970-1978). A publication linked to the EAB, the main objectives of the periodical were to record the institution's activities and promote exchanges with other art schools operating in Brazil and abroad, also acting as a disseminator of the project of education through art that she had undertaken. In addition to reflective or opinion articles on art in education, the journal addressed topics related to education in general, including psychology in education, arts, literature, and communication.

Since the journal was launched, the prominent presence of the term creativity, one of the constituent elements of the educational model advocated, was aligned with the new direction sought by EAB. The institution committed to incorporating contributions from science and technology into its work, expanding investigative activities in its areas of expertise “[...] to extend its scope of action and insert a new dimension into its creative function” (Rodrigues, 1970, p. 1). According to the author, the editorial initiative sought to “[...] document its creative work, socialize experiences through the dissemination of research, and keep the public informed of current trends in education, inspired by the ideals of freedom and creativity, in the service of peace” (Rodrigues, 1970, p. 1). Thus, the debate on creative education and creativity in the 1970s was part of the education scope through art, especially in the context of EAB⁹ and art schools.

Regarding the circulation of the term creativity in the journal Arte & Educação, many authors used it in their texts, often in a naturalized way, but always to add value to their discussions. Expressions such as “creative art”, “creative activity”, “creative imagination” or “creative process”, among many others, populate the pages of the periodical, as well as qualifying definitions of the subjects and institutions mentioned as a “creative agent”, “creative teacher” or “creative school”. In the texts of a more reflective nature, written by various authors¹⁰, those that referenced the concept of creativity stand out to establish a position in favor of creative education, valuing the dynamism of the mind and the possibility of self-conscious development. Alongside texts by Tom Hudson and Durmeval Trigueiro Mendes, educator and philosopher, are those by Maria Helena Novaes. There were seven articles¹¹ published between 1970 and 1976, of which five dealt specifically with the theme of creativity.

In the text published in the experimental edition of the journal Arte & Educação, in December 1970, the initial proposition was to open up to changes in a society that was becoming increasingly dynamic and technological:

Social pressures, technological impositions, behavioral sciences and other sources of transformation are modifying the nature of the educational process in multiple aspects: every time there is a simple change in the curriculum or school organization, the role of the teacher changes (Novaes, 1970a, p. 9).

Her expectations were focused on the role of teachers as a starting point for the changes needed to meet the current reality. The issue of pressures arising from technological advances was shared by other authors of the period and participants in the Insea Congress, such as Tom Hudson, who addressed the issue repeatedly in the journal Arte & Educação between 1971 and 1972. Focusing on the relationship between art and technology, she believed that creative education should also include training professionals in technical fields, such as engineers, proposing the integration of work among art, design, and architecture students (Hudson, 1971a; 1971b; 1972).

For Novaes (1970a), teacher training was part of the solution to improving the relationship with the advancement of technological development. In her presentation at the conference, the author discussed the Escolinha teacher training course, repeatedly highlighting the issue of creativity as a strategic element for teaching activities. She emphasized that creative activities result from an interaction between people and the environment, and are therefore responsible for allowing “[...] the individual to progress by himself, consciously, in a unique style of learning” (Novaes, 1970a, p. 9). In this sense, she emphasized that teachers should undergo preparation that would lead them to become flexible, creative, and innovative so that they would be able to stimulate students to engage in creative activities.

In the text Por Que Deve o Homem Ficar Conformado com o que já Inventou e Descobriu? (1971a), written for Arte & Educação in early 1971, Novaes gives the reader an overview of the activities of the conference in which she participated, especially the day dedicated to the study of creativity and technology. Considering this one of the highlights of the conference, the author explored the ideas of Tom Hudson and Margareth Naumburg on the importance of creativity in education, highlighting the role of psychology in the analysis of creative processes for art and education. One of the highlights of Hudson's thinking, in addition to the relationship between art and technology and the concern with human alienation, was the criticism of the limited progress of education:

In the field of education, progress was minimal, with the standardization of teaching methods and educational systems persisting, as well as the use of outdated techniques, always seeking to encourage the development of the same intellectual processes, without leading students to any new or creative perspective (Novaes, 1971a, p. 14).

By selecting this thought for her text, the author somehow pointed out that the educational gaps of art teachers were among the main discussions at that event. Regarding the debate, she highlighted:

It was concluded that [training] must, above all, be well cared for, through well-structured courses that lead teachers to understand the scope of the importance of art in education to be able to encourage artistic appreciation, visual education, intensifying perceptive development through sensory stimuli, involving real objects and our world of communication [...] All interaction between sensitivity and understanding must be developed gradually, and can be helped to emerge through diversified stimuli (Novaes, 1971a, p. 15).

These were demands met in the courses offered by EAB which, in Novaes's (1971a) perception, represented a great contribution to the Brazilian educational scenario. However, the training was still quite restricted, considering the number of teachers across the country who had access to it and who, supposedly, would be able to develop the issues raised there with their respective students.

The final highlight of this text by Novaes (1971a, p. 15) was related to the contributions of psychology to art education, an area that could enlighten artists, educators, and interested parties about “[...] artistic phenomena, processes and levels of creativity”. Within this, much was discussed from the 1970s onwards about what should be a priority in school, whether the process or the product, especially in Brazil after Law 5.692/71. The regulations resulting from that legislation emphasized the process, to the detriment of the product (Santini, 2021). The author also highlighted the certainties that would have been reinforced by the aforementioned event in which she evidently agreed:

That creative behavior can only be analyzed within the category of integrative behaviors, since we feel, think, act, and create as a whole; [...] the socio-cultural, educational, psychological, and aesthetic aspects of artistic education must always be analyzed concomitantly; [...] the creative dimension must be inherent to the educational process, leading individuals not only to learn to make new associations to integrate objects in a creative process but also to know how to manipulate them in a creative way to activate their mind and discover new mental potentialities (Novaes, 1971a, p. 15)

Between 1971 and 1974, the concept of creativity and its implications in education were explored in depth by Novaes in four published texts (Novaes, 1971b, p. 8; Novaes, 1971c, p. 7; Novaes, 1972, p. 4-5; Novaes, 1974, p. 9-11). The expression of creativity was analyzed critically through topics related to the creative dimension in the educational process. Considering the differences between creativity-product and creativity-process, Novaes (1971b, p. 8) asserts that the creative product does not always result from a specific way that the individual perceives the world. In other words, creative attitudes are not necessarily related to original products or creative activities, although this may occur in practice.

For the author, education with a creative sense should prioritize the creative attitude. In her words:

[...] to favor the mobilization of the creative potential of individuals, not only promoting creative activities aimed at pre-established products but above all, internal creative attitudes, stimulating transformation, in addition to the re-evaluation of ideas and concepts, inventiveness, curiosity, and the spirit of research (Novaes, 1971b, p. 8).

Novaes highlights that an individual can have creative attitudes without being directly committed to creative activities or original products, although creative attitudes and productivity, in general, are related. In her opinion,

It is necessary to create in the individual the need not only for creative activity and product but also for a creative attitude, providing sources that generate ideas and creative actions, developing constructive criticism, encouraging the acquisition of knowledge, the selection of information, free initiative, sensitizing the individual to environmental stimuli, encouraging the manipulation of objects and ideas, the control of one's ideas and tolerance to the ambiguities of situations (Novaes, 1971b, p. 8).

Finally, Novaes emphasizes that the fact of expressing freely is much more significant than the product created, and its value is not defined by the opinion of others, but by its meaning for the person who conceived it, “[...] because it is like an extension of oneself, a part of oneself” (Novaes, 1971b, p. 8). For her, a creative education should begin in childhood, taking into account not only “[...] the coordination of the different modes of perception and sensation with each other and the environment, but also the expression of feelings in a communicable way”. In this sense, the school would need to provide conditions, both in the field of ideas and materiality, to “[...] provide students with techniques, means and an environment of freedom, where they can develop their expressive, constructive and creative capacity” (Novaes, 1971c, p. 7).

Novaes (1971c, p. 7) warns that the creative process would logically be “[...] dependent on the means that make it possible, on the experiences acquired and on the collection of information obtained”. Only in this way, in the establishment of new and original relationships, would it be possible to create, and it is important to provide students with an environment that would induce them to externalize the wealth of images formed by their minds by encouraging free and spontaneous expression. The creative dimension would be intrinsic to the educational process, given that “[...] creativity constitutes a force that is distributed throughout society, being essential for its development and should not be atrophied by social pressures” (Novaes, 1971c, p. 7). What would sustain this creative education process would be, in addition to the use of cognitive strategies, the conditioning of attitudes towards new experiences, selective perception, and the directionality of attention. Although the term conditioning seems somewhat dissonant with the idea of ​​creativity, there was a perception of the need for changes in perspective in the educational field, making strategies necessary to raise awareness of the individual to more innovative aspects.

The concern with approaching creativity from a historical perspective can be seen in the author's texts, such as the one published in 1972 in Arte & Educação. Starting chronologically with the so-called primitive cultures, Novaes highlights important moments and events based on the concept of universal history, citing inventions and human achievements of relevance up to the present time, which, according to her, brought additional challenges: “In the space age in which we live, we feel how much the creative dimension is being conditioned by cultural pressures, social mobility and technological acceleration, demanding new values ​​of creativity, both in the fields of arts and sciences” (Novaes, 1972, p. 5).

In an article published in 1974 in the same publication, the author explored the mistakes of creative education, observed within the Education through Art Movement, of which she was a member. Initially, the qualities of the aforementioned educational proposal are highlighted:

In creative education, generally, the inputs of the learning process go beyond the expected results, and creativity in education reinforces the use of cognitive strategies, in addition to conditioning attitudes of openness to new experiences, as well as selective perception and the directionality of attention (Novaes, 1974, p. 9).

The reader is alerted to what Novaes considers mistakes to be avoided in this type of pedagogical option. According to her, creative education should not be interpreted in an idealized way, conceiving it as a magic solution to educational problems. It would also be reckless to consider creativity as a modal tendency, nor to confuse the effectiveness of creative teaching with the massive production of works. Other mistakes to be avoided would be:

Devaluing the importance of the sedimentation of ‘creative attitudes’ in school activities, ignoring the implicit psychological dynamics of the creative process; [...] disrespecting ‘individual styles of creative expression’ by stereotyping students’ action patterns; [...] disconnecting ‘creative behaviors’ from the process of human interaction; [...] minimizing the socio-cultural significance of ‘artistic education’ and the role of the arts in the insertion of man in his civilizing process; [...] exploring ‘creative techniques’ without first analyzing their objectives and controlling their effects on school behavior; ignoring the value of creative education in the integral formation of students’ personalities and in the expansion of their potential; [...] forgetting the decisive influence of the creative teacher and the environmental climate favorable to the creative expansion of students (Novaes, 1974, p. 9).

The last article published by Novaes in Arte & Educação, in 1976, had a more specific bias, focusing on the importance of creativity for the cognitive development of preschool students, who would thus have more “[...] possibilities of taking advantage of their abilities and realizing their potential” (Novaes, 1976, p. 7). Children who were supported in this way would have their spontaneous expression favored, being able to channel their emotions and feelings, but the ability to organize thought and language.

In addition to the journal, much of Maria Helena Novaes' ideas on creativity in art education were discussed in the work Psychology of Creativity (Psicologia da Criatividade), published in 1971 by Vozes. This is one of the books in teaching courses and among art teachers, and in 1980 it reached its fifth edition¹², with the defense of creative education and creativity as its central points.

Printed in the 13.5 x 21 cm format, which was maintained in all its editions, the book has, in its first edition, 132 pages, housed in a green and blue layout, with flaps by Paulo de Oliveira, containing the title of the work and the name of the author. The back cover includes a brief text entitled Psicologia Escolar and an advertisement for another book by the author with this title, also published by Vozes. In its internal structure, the work has a presentation and a summary, and is composed of seven chapters: 1. Conceitos e teorias da criatividade; 2. Criatividade: processo x produto; 3. Análise do comportamento criativo; 4. Relações entre criatividade e desenvolvimento; 5. Aspectos motivacionais da criatividade; 6. Influência da criatividade no ajustamento psicológico; 7. A dimensão criadora do processo educativo. From the second edition onwards, it lost the flaps and now has 168 pages, and the following chapters: 8. Experiências criadoras para os infradotados; 9. Potencial criativo dos superdotados; and 10. O sentido universal da criatividade.

The connections with the art education project in circulation in Brazil are clear in several parts of the book, such as the flaps, which contain a text written by Augusto Rodrigues about the work and its author. The same occurs in the introductory text, in which the author explains her closeness to the EAB, as well as justifies the importance of her book in that context:

Having had the opportunity to follow the experience of the Escolinha de Arte do Brasil, founded 22 years ago by Augusto Rodrigues, an institution that leads the Brazilian Art and Education movement, I felt the need to disseminate valid experiences in the field of Psychology for teachers, artists, psychologists, and anthropologists, in short, for all those who, directly or indirectly, have an interest in creative behavior (Novaes, 1971d, p. 7).

This connection is also noted by the presence of fragments of her authorship previously published in Arte & Educação, as well as by the mention of her references at the end of some of the chapters. The use of texts already published in the journal is explicit in chapters 2, 7, and 10, including the use of the same titles, in addition to excerpts inserted in the other chapters. Other authors present in the journal are cited by the author, such as Hudson (1971a; 1971b), Rodrigues (1971) and Teixeira (1970).

Throughout the work¹³, there is an evident intense dialogue with authors, researches, and theories from various fields of knowledge. Many authors were cited and discussed¹⁴, especially those related to the themes of creativity in their relations with psychology and education, representing approximately 65% ​​of the total citations. Nevertheless, authors linked to psychology, education, art education, art, and the human sciences in general were also placed in dialogue with Novaes' ideas. The international circulation of these dialogues is noteworthy, given that more than 70% of the bibliography consulted was in a foreign language¹⁵, with 57% in English. Among the authors most frequently mobilized are Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Donald W. MacKinnon, Ellis Paul Torrance, Frank Barron, George Kneller, Jacob Getzels and Joy Paul Guilford, all related to the psychology of creativity. However, other names from the field of art and art education are present, such as Roger Bastide, Viktor Lowenfeld and Herbert Read.

Another aspect visible throughout the chapters is Novaes's relationship with the academic world. In addition to commenting on the results of international events such as the Inter-American Congress of Psychology, the Insea Congress and the Utah Creativity Research Conference, her thinking is articulated with the production of national¹⁶ and international¹⁷ scientific journals.

Academic rigor is evident in the methodological assumptions adopted by Novaes, who began the text with a discussion of concepts and theories. The author criticizes the use of the expression “creativity,” which, due to its strong appeal, would be used to represent the new and the original, without the proper scientific understanding. Etymologically, she observes that creativity is linked to the term to create, that is, “[...] to give existence to, to come out of nothing, to establish relationships not previously established by the individual’s universe, aiming at certain ends” (Novaes, 1971d, p. 17). According to her, the various definitions of creativity could be classified into four categories, related as follows:

to the person who creates, emphasizing aspects of temperament, traits, values, and emotional attitudes; to the creative process, highlighting creative thinking, motivations, and perception; to the product created, analyzing inventions, artistic works, or scientific innovations; and to environmental influences, educational, social and cultural conditioning (Novaes, 1971d, p. 17, our emphasis).

The theme of creativity was uniquely addressed in the second chapter through the opposition between process and product, a theme also published in the journal Arte & Educação and previously discussed here. The author states that a creative product may or may not result from a particular way of seeing the world. Furthermore, attributing the creative product only to the unconventional or different is, according to her, a common mistake that can lead to negative conditioning of individuals, artificializing the search for something that is only different from a cultural or social point of view. Both the process and the product are considered performance references for the student, although Novaes (1971b) grants more meaning to the student's processes of free and creative expression:

The integral formation of the student's personality will be incomplete whenever creative expression is relegated to a secondary plane, and it is essential to consider that, for the individual, the fact of expressing freely is much more significant than the product created (Novaes, 1971b, p. 8).

This emphasis on procedural aspects, derived from psychology, was in a certain way appropriated and considered the most important in Law 5,692/71, by CFE Opinion 540 of 1977, when stating that

[...] activities, even when specific, when it is assumed that the student's choice corresponds to his/her possible aptitudes, are not aimed at training artists. It would make no sense, therefore, to keep the student tied to an option in which his/her performance does not reveal his/her greatest interest, denying him/her the opportunity for other experiences, and much less preventing promotion to those who do not present satisfactory results in terms of product: the “ugly” drawing, the clumsy dance, the dissonant performance in the group, the off-key singing in the choir (São Paulo, 1984, p. 185, author's emphasis).

Based on this legal framework, there is a certain concentration of analysis of creativity from a psychological perspective and not so much on the result of artistic production, dissociating the two aspects. Although Law 5,692/71 intended to give way to a freer expression of the student, in that context, the interpretation of the process and product of creativity shows, in part, that one of the consequences of this may have been the reverberation in artistic education through activities (in a doing for the sake of doing), theoretically based on the process and not specifically on its results (Santini, 2021).

From the third chapter onwards, Novaes addresses the issue of creativity perspectives, always in constant dialogue with the many authors involved, with varying approaches to its connections with art. Creative behavior was the focus of approaches such as developmental, conductivist, Gestalt, culturalist, or psychoanalytic, with its main characteristics, the different stages of the creative process, and the links between creativity and intelligence being discussed. For the author, creative behavior should be interpreted “[...] always taking into account the complex of stimulating conditions, energizing factors and the possibilities of behavioral variations” (Novaes, 1971d, p. 63).

Another point covered in the work Psicologia da Criatividade was the relationship between creativity and development and the development of creativity and its problems, with technical proposals and resources for its stimulation. Novaes asserts that “[...] creativity can and should be developed, with the educational process and social influences having a great influence [...]” (Novaes, 1971d, p. 80), with this development being conditioned by individual and evolutionary limits and capable of favoring the psychological evolution of the personality.

The author focused on the motivational aspects of creativity and its relationship with technology, arguing that the concept is not limited to the arts, but encompasses all sciences. Its influence on psychological adjustment was also discussed, and the idea of ​​the therapeutic function of art as a creative activity was defended. Finally, the last chapter of the first edition dealt with the creative nature of the educational process, focusing on the importance of developing creative attitudes and their cultural determinants. In it, the Art and Education Movement was given a specific topic, citing the experience of the EAB.

The three chapters added in the second edition brought up issues related to the gifted, based on themes such as the typical problems of the so-called “mentally retarded,” emotional disorders, and the creative reorganization of experiences and creative stimulation. Finally, the chapter that addresses the universal meaning of creativity maps out some historical moments in which creativity played a leading role, reaching the contemporary context. The book ends with a message to future generations, holding them responsible for establishing a better society based on the incorporation of creativity as a value:

Modern man, and especially young people, are responsible for creative direction, since their historical role will be to participate in the creation of a new culture as an instrument for developing forms of existence that are not antagonistic to what is essential for the fullness of human life. The truly young are those who know how to place the problems of the world, of life and of society in a creative philosophical perspective, and to embrace the new world that is beginning to emerge (Novaes, 1971d, p. 165).

These ideas expressed by Novaes were supported by authors such as Carl Rogers (1970, p. 302), a psychologist who argued that creativity is related to “[...] man’s tendency to be, to become what he is potential to be”. A few years later, the artist Fayga Ostrower (1977) argued that creativity is not exclusive to chosen artists, but a potential inherent to the human condition. The author perceived creativity as part of man but within a specific cultural context, interconnecting the individual and cultural levels of human existence. Her concerns focused on man’s alienation from multiple social demands, contradictory information from the social environment, and technological growth. In this sense, one can see an alignment with the thinking of predecessors such as Hudson (1971) and Novaes (1970; 1971), showing that the seeds planted in the early years of the 1970s would continue to germinate among the intellectuals linked to education, art and psychology.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

Maria Helena Novaes dedicated a large part of her life to psychology and education, playing a significant role, especially in the School Psychology FIELD in Brazil and art education. Her strong connection with artistic production and her experience with cultures from other countries paved the way for her position in defense of art and creativity in the educational field, strongly disseminating these ideas in the Escolinha de Arte do Brasil, in the journal Arte & Educação, as well as in courses and books of her authorship.

Through the fruitful dialogue she established with foreign researchers and with ongoing research into human creativity, Novaes strengthened her relationships in the scientific field of psychology, which she helped to establish in Brazil. In the context of the 1970s, when the search for the development of creativity was the object of several fields of knowledge, particularly psychology, she engaged in the debate and actions for the establishment of School Psychology and favor of art in education.

Finally, at a time when there was still no consolidated higher education in the areas of art and psychology, Maria Helena Novaes became involved in art education projects, assuming an evident role of intervention in the Brazilian educational field. This involvement in favor of the cause of developing creativity took place in teacher training through courses, lectures, and various writings.