In Heiko Hecht, Margaret Atherton & Robert Schwartz (eds.), Looking Into Pictures: an interdisciplinary approach to pictorial space. MIT Press. pp. 145-165 (2003)

Authors
Robert Hopkins
New York University
Abstract
What is special about picturing according to the rules of perspectival drawing systems? My answer is at once both radical and conciliatory. I think that depiction essentially involves a distinctive experience, an experience of resemblance. More precisely, the picture must be seen as preserving what Thomas Reid (Enquiry 1764) called the "visible figure" of what is represented. It follows from this, and from some other plausible premises, that if a picture is to depict detailed spatial arrangements, rather than simply to represent them in some other, non-pictorial, way, it must conform to perspectival rules. Hence the radicalism. Perspective does not provide uniquely accurate or realistic ways to depict things, but, for certain aspects of the world, the only way to depict them at all. What of the conciliatory aspect of my view? My account of depiction in no way implies that only perspectival pictures can depict anything at all. Indeed, it is quite consistent with a good deal of variation in the marks which might, in the right context, depict a given content. But better still, the factors determining what we see a picture as resembling, and hence partially determining what it depicts, are just those factors emphasized by those who take perspective to be a matter of convention. They include, for instance, the nature of the subject's perceptual environment, and the sorts of pictures to which he has previously been exposed. Thus, even given the radical claim, the variety in ways of depicting a given thing is neither incomprehensible nor indicative of some kind of failure. We can understand perspective's special status without denigrating the alternatives.
Keywords Depiction  Perspective  Convention
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Against Depictive Conventionalism.Catharine Abell - 2005 - American Philosophical Quarterly 42 (3):185 - 197.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Las Meninas and the Illusion of Illusionism.Johan Veldeman & E. Myin - 2008 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 15 (9):124-130.
Resemblance, Restriction, and Content‐Bearing Features.John Dilworth - 2005 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 63 (1):67–70.
Exorcizing the Ghost of Mental Imagery.Stevan Harnad - 1993 - Computational Intelligence 9 (4):337-339.
Sculpture and Perspective.R. Hopkins - 2010 - British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (4):357-373.
Understanding Pictures.Dominic Lopes - 1996 - Oxford University Press.
Canny Resemblance.Catharine Abell - 2009 - Philosophical Review 118 (2):183-223.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-07-27

Total views
151 ( #57,351 of 2,326,025 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #56,386 of 2,326,025 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes