Several years ago I was fortunate enough to visit a museum exhibit of Picasso’s Bull: a series of eleven lithographs that explored what the essence of being a bull really was. Starting with a beautifully rendered drawing of a bull, Picasso stripped away layer after layer of detail until he got to the “gist” of “bull.”
Through eleven iterations, he took the idea of “bull” from this:
to this:
So what is the “essence” or “gist” of the “bull?” To Picasso, it came down to two things: the horns and the penis.
When I first saw Picasso’s progression, I thought it beautiful. As a graphic facilitator, I now think of that progression as profound. So much so that it has actually become one of my mantras. I even say it to college students in my guest lectures:
When you are sharing ideas in real time, don’t go “full bull;” go for the horns and the penis.
This is a deceptively simple practice. When you look at the full lithograph series, it’s clear that Picasso didn’t just leap to the conclusion that these two things were what the bull was all about. Only by truly knowing and understanding his subject was he able to strip away all things unessential to reveal the elements that had to remain for the “bull” to still be “bull.”
To get to the gist of an idea, you have to first truly understand that idea.
To become agile in getting to the gist of other people’s ideas, the visual practitioner can start by bringing that same level of understanding and refinement when crafting their own visual iconography or vocabulary. What are the essential traits or characteristics that make “apple” an apple, and not an orange? People co-create meaning through shared experience, so if I look at your “apple” and think “orange,” we’re not on the same page. Our meaning is conflicted. When I look at Picasso’s essential “bull,” I think “bull.” He was able to effectively communicate the gist of that idea, and we are on the same page.
