On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:56 PM, William Conger wrote:
But perspective is all fiction.
Perhaps an approximation, but I don't follow how or why you call it a fiction. Unless you mean that anything put on the canvas, being not the actual object, is a fictitious version of the object?
I have brought this up a number of times before. I believe the artist's freedom to put the road or wall or horizon line or arm anywhere he or she wants is the crux of the fictitiousness of art. The mode and appearance of the representations is the artist's free choice. But I don't agree that perspective itself is a fiction. It's an approximation and a kind of mapping, which is limited by its scale and what is included.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
