04-26-2013, 08:04 PM
May I remeber you dear friends, that the term 'Artistic convention' is abused?
The term has some meaning if it's immediatley followed by a good presentation of the Artistic languages of the area to which belongs the object.
We cannot use the term 'Artistic convention' to indicate the Middle East and Greece, the Gallic provinces and Egypt, the the figurative cultures and languages were profoundly different expecially from the III century onward! Look these two sculptures, they belong to the same period and to the same area, but they seem coming from two different worlds! Two different figurative languages, two different 'Artistic conventions' are working here:
![[Image: Diocletianus-a.jpg]](http://i1155.photobucket.com/albums/p557/ironfather1/Diocletianus-a.jpg)
![[Image: fig_6webBibliotecaVaticanaCoppiadiTetrar...Massim.jpg]](http://i1155.photobucket.com/albums/p557/ironfather1/fig_6webBibliotecaVaticanaCoppiadiTetrarchi-Dioc-Massim.jpg)
Also the use of the representation of the space, called 'perspective' and today 3D, is an Invention of the Italian Renaissance, other artistic civilizations used different methods to represent the volume of the objects, the visual representation of the perspective of an object changes during the historical time and it's is rooted in the figurative culture of the area to which belong the object and the artist.
Being the 'perspective a symbolic form', it cannot be used to criticize the real shape of an object.
We should be also very cautios comparing Byzantine and Carolingian arrtistic images between them, and we should be also very cautious comparing artistic creations belonging to the Roman Late Antiquity with artistic works belonging to the Byzantine medieval iconographic culture.
Believe me: The term 'artistic convention' opens the gates on an universe of boundless complexity, it should be better being very, very, very cautious handling the expression 'Artistic convention'.....
The term has some meaning if it's immediatley followed by a good presentation of the Artistic languages of the area to which belongs the object.
We cannot use the term 'Artistic convention' to indicate the Middle East and Greece, the Gallic provinces and Egypt, the the figurative cultures and languages were profoundly different expecially from the III century onward! Look these two sculptures, they belong to the same period and to the same area, but they seem coming from two different worlds! Two different figurative languages, two different 'Artistic conventions' are working here:
Also the use of the representation of the space, called 'perspective' and today 3D, is an Invention of the Italian Renaissance, other artistic civilizations used different methods to represent the volume of the objects, the visual representation of the perspective of an object changes during the historical time and it's is rooted in the figurative culture of the area to which belong the object and the artist.
Being the 'perspective a symbolic form', it cannot be used to criticize the real shape of an object.
We should be also very cautios comparing Byzantine and Carolingian arrtistic images between them, and we should be also very cautious comparing artistic creations belonging to the Roman Late Antiquity with artistic works belonging to the Byzantine medieval iconographic culture.
Believe me: The term 'artistic convention' opens the gates on an universe of boundless complexity, it should be better being very, very, very cautious handling the expression 'Artistic convention'.....
