concept of space - zupnick

8/3/2019 Concept of Space - Zupnick

1/8

Concept of Space and Spatial Organization in Art

Author(s): Irving L. ZupnickReviewed work(s):Source: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Dec., 1959), pp. 215-221Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The American Society for AestheticsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/427268 .

Accessed: 04/12/2011 22:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell Publishing and The American Society for Aesthetics are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=tasfahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/427268?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/427268?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=tasfahttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black


2/8

CONCEPT OF SPACE AND SPATIAL ORGANIZATION IN ARTIRVING L. ZUPNICK

Sensations of space or depth are important visual effects of art. The mannerof arranging elements of design to create these sensations is a function of theartist's intuition; however, his intuition is influenced not only by his trainingand background but also by ideas about the nature of space that he shares withhis contemporaries. Since the knowledge of this relationship of artist and milieuis crucial to our understanding of the types of spatial organization in eachhistorical period, it would be tempting to trace a parallel historical developmentin art to recent histories of spatial concepts in science, (e.g.: Max Jammer, Con-cepts of Space-The History of Theories of Space in Physics1 and AlexandreKoyre, From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe2), except that such ahistory could be misleading. That is, a history of this type would seem to implyunjustifiably that there was a close relationship between artists and scientists,and it would be an over-simplification in minimizing the other factors that in-fluence an artist's compositions.In studying spatial organization in art, we must not only describe or define,but must try to explain its development. The materials of our research are pri-marily final results-pictures, statues, or structures. Theoretical systems, likerules of perspective or canons of proportion and composition, are aids to ourunderstanding, but they do not explain variations and individual differences.This is true because the final results reflect a combination of varied proportionsof both intuition and system. It should be understood, therefore, that in definingor describing the modes of spatial organization in the following pages, we arenot using the term "system" to describe a consciously applied modus operandi,but rather to delineate a configuration of attributes which have been noted inthe works of art themselves.There are at least seven of these "systems" or varieties of spatial organiza-tion in the history of Western art. We have named the first three as Classical,Renaissance, and Baroque, since they were most fully developed in those art-historical periods after which they are named. The other four, the Primitive,Conceptual, Empirical, and Relativistic varieties of spatial organization, havenot been named after historical periods to emphasize the fact that they havebeen recurrent tendencies throughout the history of art.

In Classical art the sensation of space was developed in discrete parallel unitsor planes without a unified perspective system. Thus, in paintings or reliefs thereis a measurable, clearly-defined recession into depth, with background figuresfailing to show perspective diminution. Frequently the problem of perspectivewas side-stepped by using a neutral or architectural background as a foil for afrieze of figures.1Cambridge,Mass.,1954.2 New York, 1958.

215


3/8

216 IRVING L. ZUPNICKThe classical spatial system is also operative in Greco-Roman architecture,for example. The colonnaded portico overlays the cella wall in much the sameway that a frieze of figures appears before a neutral backdrop, while Romanarchitecture is only comparatively rather than actually baroque, since it doesnot give the sensation of continuously flowing space, but rather of increasingcomplexity in terms of discrete units, some units curving space in domes andniches.Problems of foreshortening could be solved by classically-oriented paintersand sculptors without departing from the system, since they could connect

parallel contours of the limbs as they recede into depth, (in the method de-scribed by Kimon Nicolaides, The Natural Way to Draw3).The classical system for organizing and depicting space had striking parallelsin the scientific interpretation of space by the ancient world. A peculiar notion,developed from Pythagorean theory by Plato's Timaeus and Aristotle's Cate-gories and Physics, seems to have prevented the Greeks from developing theconcept of spatial coordinates, and to have limited Euclidean geometry to themeasurement of solids and planes.4 Essentially, this notion was that space hadqualitative rather than quantitative, or homogeneous characteristics, for ac-cording to these classical authors the limits of space were defined by the geo-metric surfaces of the solids that contained or confined it.5 Since in the naturalworld there is variation in the location and forms of the solids that so definespace, the only logical assumption could be that space was not homogeneousand undifferentiated, and therefore it must vary according to direction or axis.It follows then, that space could only be understood through a physical de-scription or measurement of the vicissitudes it suffered as it receded from us indepth, breadth, and height.Paradoxically, the logical clarity and precision of Classical art seem to bedue in part to this inhibitive fallacy concerning space. The inability to graspspace as a continuum led to a concentration on parts, so that, although in to-tality Classical art stands for harmonic articulation and organization to us,in actuality it seems to have been conceived in terms of highly developed seg-ments of the whole. That these segments work so well together attests to thecomplete development of the system.

Renaissance spatial concepts, as they slowly displaced medieval traditionsbased upon other than sensate meaning, were organized in accordance with therediscovered classical system, which, however, was drastically changed throughthe incorporation of a system of unified linear perspective.The persistence of medieval tradition in Renaissance spatial organization isworthy of deeper study than we can give it here; however, suffice it to note thefrequent representation of supernatural events in conjunction with worldlyones, and the iconological importance given to space even in later compositionslike Raphael's School of Athens.

Boston, 1941,pp. 20 ff.4Jammer, op. cit., pp. 7 ff. and pp. 23-24.5Plato, Timaeus, 55 ff.; Aristotle, Physics, 203a, 209b.


4/8

SPACE AND SPATIAL ORGANIZATIONN ART 217In general, however,in fully-developedRenaissancepainting we are madeacutely aware of a consistentlyperfectsystem for showingperspectivediminu-tion, where the size of each figureor object can be precisely definedthroughspatial coordinates.Aboveall, this is a finite system, preciselydefininga finiteworld. The precisiongoes to the point that the strongly definededges of thefigures clearly separatethem from their backgrounds,and to maintainingtheintegrityof eachparallelspatial plane.The precisionof edgeseven counteractsthe optical effects of foreshortening,makingit impossiblefor the Renaissanceartist to unite one plane to the other except throughthe convention,we can-not call it visual effect, of linearperspective.The sfumatotreatmentof depthand the edges of figureswas an attemptto give some continuityto space, butin maintaininga distinct planar arrangementhe artist made us aware of the

constructedand piecemeal conquestof depth.Baroquespatial organizationattemptsto give the illusion of continuousandhomogeneous pace. In painting and sculpture,solidly modelledfiguresmovefreely into depth, losing the preciseoutlines that in Renaissanceart meant astep by step or plane by plane projection.In architecture he structure alter-nated convexitiesand concavitiesin shapingand being shaped by space in acontinuoussense.The iconological ignificanceof spacewhichcontinued o be important n theearlierBaroqueemphasison vis-a-vis with the saints, graduallysuccumbed othe importanceof spaceitself, as in Callot'sengravedMartyrdomof Saint Se-bastian,where the Saint faded into insignificanceas a distant target.The Baroqueconceptof space in art was foreshadowedby the underminingof Aristotelean influenceon science in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries

(Jammer,pp. 51 if.), whichculminated n the writingsof BernardinoTelesio,6GiordanoBruno,7and TommasoCampanella.8Essentially, they rejected thequalitative spatial concepts of the classical writers for the new concept of ahomogeneous,ncorporeal pace,which,Campanellanoted9couldbe penetratedcorporeallywhile it penetratedwithout corporeality.To express he idea that spacewas a vast andinfinitecontinuum, he painters,sculptors,andarchitectsmade use of an interestingdevice,that of bringingpartof their workcloseto the spectatorso that he could have somethingwith whichto measurethe immensetotality of the scheme.With this in mind, Berniniplacedthe greatcurvingcolonnade n the piazzabeforeSt. Peter's,and Rubensalmostput the daughtersof Leucippus n our laps.To counteract he sensationthat the backgrounds merelya backdrop o the figures n the foreground,hepainters diffusedthe edges of the figures,approximating he optical effect ofaerial perspective.The primitivesystemof organizing pacehas almosta continuous"tradition,"6De natura rerumjuxta propriaprincipialibri novem (Naples, 1586).7On the Infinite Universe and Worlds,trans. Dorothea Waley Singer in GiordanoBruno(New York,1950).8Physiologia (Paris, 1637).9Physiologia,I, 2.


5/8

218 IRVING L. ZUPNICKsince it may be found exemplified in the art of children and primitive artists ofall cultural epochs. It is also to be found in the earliest styles of various peoples,and in ancient Egypt, for example. Although Egyptian art was representativeof an otherwise highly developed culture, it showed a persistence of primitivespatial concepts through many centuries of development.A primitive concept of space suggests, through its methods of representingthe visual world, an inability to comprehend or express spatial extension ofsolid objects. Its basis is anthropocentric, dependent entirely upon concretepersonal orientations, which develop through piecemeal accretion of isolatedexperiences into a more or less organized complex of local directions.10 Sincethere is no question of systematic unification of these isolated impressions ac-cording to, say, a unified optical point of view, what emerges is a composite ofthe most salient factors in the separate experiences.Working within the limitations of a primitive concept of space, a sculptorwould exhibit a tactile approach, confining himself to the surfaces of his ma-terial. Perhaps he could not conceive of a figure that twists or turns in space,or if he did imagine such a figure, he would not have the technical means toexecute more than a rudimentary schematization, since he was not conditionedto express extension from the stone block into space. Unable to create a mobilefigure because the sculptor lacked the knowledge of foreshortening and articu-lating limbs, he would have to itemize each part as a slightly rounded but essen-tially flat profile that clings to the original volume of the stone. At the higheststage in primitive development, the sculptor would be capable of achievingpowerful, well-defined planes for the individual parts of his figures, and rein-forced by repeated observations of nature, he would be able to give at least asurface impression of completeness and harmonious organization.The primitive painter or sculptor of reliefs makes figures that are flat andfrontal, or he assembles flat profiles of parts of the figure to symbolize action ormovement through space, as in the paratactile striding figures in Egyptian art.These reflect isolated experiences which have not been organized according toan optical system of representation. Unable to create an illusion of depth, eitheras a continuous extension or in layers, the primitive pictorial artist shows dis-tant figures higher and on the same plane as those in the foreground. Further,the primitive architect develops his structures in seeming inability to free spacefrom the material with which he builds, impressing us more with the massive-ness of his forest of columns or the compression of space in his corbelled domes,igloos, and huts.

Illusionism and physical function are of secondary importance in conceptualorganization of space, even where they are present. Here the primary interestlies in the expression of ideas or emotional content. For example, in the medie-val artistic tradition, position and scale of the figures were related to a hierarchyof importance and meaning. The Madonna or saint occupied the center of thecomposition, whereas secondary personages were relegated to flanking positionsand sometimes shown in smaller scale, contrary to visual experience.

10See Jammer, op. cit., pp. 5 if.


6/8

SPACE AND SPATIAL ORGANIZATION N ART 219Spatial organizationwas also modifiedon the basis of subjective and dog-matic reasons,and contraryto observablephenomena,by both the Manneristsof the sixteenthandthe Expressionists f the twentiethcentury.11The arbitraryuse of color and distortionof natural forms are accompaniedby an equallyarbitraryhandlingof space.In Manneristpainting,for example,no real spaceseems to exist betweenthe figuresseen in groups,whereparts of backgroundfiguresandthe backgroundseek the surfaceplane, intruding nto the residualspaces aroundthe foreground igures.In the work of the Expressionists, paceis either distorted to suggest tension and oppressionas in Beckmann's1920Family Picture, or to suggestexplosiveforce as in Munch's The Shriek,whereagainthe backgrounds givenas muchexpressive mportanceas the figures.The spiritualkinshipbetweenMannerism,Expressionism, nd Medieval art

is revealed n their conceptualuse of space.Here,whereso muchimportance sgiven to distortionas an emphasisof gestureand emotionalcontent,they havethe closest rapprochement.As the figuressurrender heir natural proportionsto the requirement f gestureand emphasis, heir lack of visual realismwarpsthe reality of the surrounding pace.Empiricalspatial organizations the resultof the coordinationof the artist'shand and eye to recreatewhat is actually observed,presumablywithout theinhibitingfactor of theory or precept.The goal is the exact recordingof per-ceived visual data and,throughthe astute observationsof the artist universalprinciplesof form,color,and light are sometimesdiscovered. t is an art some-whatin the spiritof Newton,whoconsidered hat relativespace,or that knownthrough he senses,is importantonly insofaras it gives informationabout ab-solute space,in whichuniversal aws are revealed.12Empiricalobservationsupplantingconceptualknowledgeof patternrevealedto Velasquez hat patternwas lost in glareor shadowthat fell on the Infanta'sgownas it was moldedby the volumesof her form.The factorof reflectedcoloras a cue to volume and space relationshipshas also been made part of therealisticpainter's echnical"vocabulary,"hrough he workof artists like Ver-

meer,Velasquez,and Rembrandt;while Cezanne, n direct study of landscape,observed he effectof distance n "cooling" olor.Relativistic handling of space is primarily a conceptualexposition of thethesis that absolutereality does not exist. In his attack on Newton'sassertionof absolute space, Kant took the position that our conceptof space is purelyintuitive and subjective,'3while Berkeley, that exemplar of the subjectiveidealist, asserted that absolute space was a false concept since its existencecouldnot be attested to by the senses.14Thus, empiricism endedto doubtthe' For an interpretation of Mannerist aims, see I. L. Zupnick, "The 'Aesthetics' of theEarly Mannerists,"Art Bulletin, XXXV (Dec. 1953),4, 302 ff.' F. Cajori, ed., Sir Isaac Newton's Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy andhis System of the World. A Revision of Mott's Translation(U. of CaliforniaP., 1934),p. 6.'Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (New York, 1950),pp. 32 ff.14 George Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, from The Works of George Berke-


7/8

220 IRVING L. ZU-PNICKconclusions postulated by other empiricists, and it remained for the develop-ments of experimental physics in the mid-nineteenth century to deal the finalblow to the concept of absolute space and prepare the way for the theory ofrelativity.15The concept of relativity in space and time tends to undermine the validityof absolute dogmas in many fields. As Maeterlinck expressed it:

Le probleme de la quatrieme dimension n'est pas seulement un probleme mathematique,c'est un probleme qui se mele a la vie reelle, tout au moins a la vie superieure de tous lesjours; et comme beaucoup de problemes de ce genre, par exemple en theologie, en meta-physique, en strategie, sous le prestigieux appareil scientifique qui a premiere vue les rendinabordables, se cache une simple question de bon sens qui sait tirer parti de faits et d'ob-servations souvent presque inconnus, mais que n'importe qui, une fois qu'il les a sous lesyeux, peut etudier, et comprendre avec fruit.l6That is, the theory of relativity was a new key to our comprehension of theworld, creating at the same time both a personal space, which was valid onlyfor the individual observer, and an "impersonal space," to use Maeterlinck'sterm,17which was constantly in flux. In the light of what relativism has taughtus, the sensory observations of a constant and motionless observer cannot beconsidered as an important interpretation of the world. Even the Impressionists,in a way, gave evidence of a faltering belief in absolute reality in their studiesof subjects painted under different lighting conditions.18A relativistic treatment of space tries to compensate for what is consideredto be the limitations of the individual, by adding the factors of time and multi-ple views in the belief that compounded momentary impressions are closer totruth than a static image of the academic type. Calder's mobiles and ThomasWilfred's "Color Organ" are the ultimate in literal interpretations of this idea.Impressionism, while essentially related to the empirical approach in seekingoptical reality, ended in creating a pictorial and sculptural space in which formswere only relatively delineated in particles of light and color. Cubism, in re-arranging the spatial world to include multiple views in a compound image,created an all-over surface movement of advancing and receding planes. Thus,relativistic space is a theoretical rather than observable quotidian space; vary-ing according to individual or group philosophy. To the degree that relativisticspace departs from external reality it places increasing emphasis on the textureand color effects of the media.

Contemporary art, as it is analogous to relativity, relies upon individualintuition as a means of discovering or illuminating absolute truths. In creatinga new visual world that is with some difficulty associated with empirical visualexperience, which is considered to be limited in point of view, the artist hopesley, Bishop of Cloyne, ed. A. A. Luce and T. E. Jessop, Vol. I (Edinburgh,1949), pp. 89, no.110; 90, no. 111; 94, no. 117.15Jammer,op. cit., pp. 145ff."6Maurice Maeterlinck, La Vie de l'Espace (Paris, 1928),pp. 8-9.17Ibid., p. 22."8Seealso, R. Goldwater and M. Treves, Artists on Art, (New York, 1945), p. 322, forRenoir'scomplaintthat the light changedno matter how rapidlyhe worked.


8/8

SPACE AND SPATIAL ORGANIZATIONN ART 221to come closer to universal values like "impersonal space." Since older formsof space are suspect and the perceived object is no longer consistent with ab-solute truth, artists now seek to represent philosophical ideas and emotionalimpressions in terms of the media rather than through commonly acceptedsymbols. Although depiction of space is usually of secondary importance inAbstract Expressionism and Action Painting, the sensation of space given byworks of these schools is purely arbitrary and personal, and as such is in therelativistic tendency.

concept of space - zupnick

Documents