>>7716812
>>7716815
>>7716817
I think originality is mostly a meme. imho style or expressiveness is really a mater of personality and taste. It's not really worth talking about in the context of art education, because being creative and having unique ideas is (next to) worthless if you don't have the technical skill to execute them to a commercially viable level. If you are learning to draw but your teacher is a bit of a square, then it doesn't really change whether he or she is a good teacher.
There are many great, creative, groundbreaking artists, who are fucking weird and socially inept and have personality disorders who would probably make terrible teachers of fundamentals. These people might be mentors to already int artists, and can be sources of creative inspiration, but you shouldn't expect them to be the best teachers of fundamentals.
Also I am 50-50 on whether good taste can even be taught. Some people are technically immaculate artists who spend all their time drawing strange fetish porn, and some people have a lot to say but don't have the practiced eloquence or skill with the language to be heard by a large audience; the best artist (I think) would strive for both.
Also the teacher in question draws figure to pic related level. I do believe that figure drawing can be an end in itself, so even if the teacher ONLY draws figures and anatomy (she doesn't btw) I would still consider her a very mature artist. Her stuff is full of soul and passion and it's technically immaculate, and that's enough for me lmao.