While reading Jean fisher’s “On drawing” I was intrigued when she said “the act of drawing dismantles consciousness and plunges the self into a zone of experience or sensation liberated from the closure of representation and open to the free play of possibilities”. This captivated me because this is how I feel when I create any piece of artwork, including drawings. Furthermore I also enjoyed when Jean expressed drawing is really to become entangled with the thought of creative power because, yes the artist is in charge of the material and the expression he or she draws/creates. However I then thought why is this only directed towards drawing? Yes I gain experience when I draw, but I also do when I paint. One of my main questions when reading “On Drawing” was the separation of drawing and painting. I do understand when drawing is compared to other artwork such as painting it is viewed as unfinished and insubstantial but as the reading explains when viewing a drawing you have to grasp the creative process in action and understand the secret that artist is withholding behind the drawing. Does this not make it as equally as significant? As the reading explains painting is viewed as being completed and more critical than drawing, but as the reading continues to explain drawing is a reinvention of both language and subject and also has profound dimension but why is this just a just a classification for drawing? Painting also displays a profound dimension? Why are these two mediums so segregated? I feel like they are equally important and contemporary drawing critiques this tradition of “non-importance” through practices of signification and materials in the act of making.