Alberti and the "Framing" of Perspective

Author(s): Alfonso Procaccini

Source: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Autumn, 1981), pp. 29-39
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The American Society for Aesthetics
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/430350 .
Accessed: 22/09/2013 11:43

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 support@jstor.org.

Wiley 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

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reprinted from The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, XXXX/1, Fall 1981. Printed in U.S.A.

ALFONSO PROCACCINI

Alberti and the

"Framing" of Perspective

I art is viewed as a veil that forms a decora-

tive effect in order to displace any attempt
IN CASTIGLIONE'S II Cortegiano (1528) the to penetrate and seize any of the employed
new word "sprezzatura" is introduced to techniques or tricks of the trade.
describe effectively how the courtier ought We might also turn to Machiavelli to
to manifest the nature of "grazia," that point to an alternative definition of art, or
quality which would make him appear as the Ideal. The famous words in the pivotal
ideal. The effective embodiment of "sprez- chapter XV of II Principe
(written in 1513,
zatura" for the Renaissance mind not only
published in 1532) "to write something of
represents a persuasive technique for pro- use to those who understand it appears to
jecting the image of the ideal but also serves me more proper to go to the real truth of
and provides a functional model for the for- the matter than to its . . ."6
imagination
mulation of an aesthetic code of behavior. call for a new
program, or shall we say, a
In fact, in the very same paragraph in which new
style, in order to produce that awe that
the word "sprezzatura" is introduced, a is characteristic of the aesthetic
judgment.
theory of art is advanced which directly Different as they are, taken together, these
corresponds to the theory of the enactment two dialectical theories of art point to one
of "sprezzatura": "to conceal all art and identifiable
problem with regard to Renais-
make whatever is done or said appear to sance aesthetic
theory, namely, the produc-
be without effort and almost without any tion of an aesthetic
entity that seeks to es-
thought about it." Art is defined as "that tablish its own autonomous value.7 Put
... .which does not seem to be art,"2 echo- somewhat differently, the problem concerns
ing Ovid's pronouncement that "The best the "how" that forms the ideology of aes-
art, they say,/Is that which conceals art. thetic enjoyment as an end in itself.8 It is,
. .."3 All energies of the courtier, accord- as we know, a
timely topic, one whose main
ing to Castiglione, must be devoted to the strategy is to convert a "means" into an
enactment of art as such, for if the courtier "end," the result of which is to
is found to be lacking these energies, it produce the
feeling of enjoyment for its own sake.9
would "rob a man of all credit and cause As members of the treatise genre, these
him to be held in slight esteem."4 two works continue and supplement the ac-
Art, like the Ideal, therefore, is contin- tive production in the Renaissance-of those
gent on producing what might be called an "manual books" dealing with the
question
"adjectival" effect, a charismatic air whose of how to form the "ideal." Bracketed be-
aura embellishes and at the same time dis- tween Dante's De Monarchia and
claims the very strategy that makes effective nella's Citta del Sole, the Campa-
abounds in
the claim to being "that which does not books that treat the themeperiod as it relates to po-
seem to be. . . ." For Castiglione, then, litical, social, and even personal
professional,
modes of existence. Texts like Alberti's
ALFONSOPROCACCINIis associate professor of Italian Della Famiglia, Palmieri's Della vita civile,
literature at Yale University. Ghiberti's Commentari, Pontano's De prin-

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 30 PROCACCINI

cipe, and Savonarola's Trattato on how to Courtier" 10 to see yet another confirmation
govern Florence, are just some of the more of the point.
lamiliar books portraying one ideal or an- It is important to remember that one of
other as it relates to a mode of living. But the speakers in The Courtier, Federico Fre-
unlike these books whose aim is primarily goso, explicitly declares the point: "I would
to be didactic and only secondarily to be have our game this evening be this, that
valued and enjoyed as mere books, both the one of this Company be chosen and given
Courtier and the Prince undermine the very the task of forming with words a perfect
factor of their being "manuals" by appeal- Courtier, setting forth all the conditions
ing to the element of enjoyment as the and particular qualities that are required of
"end" of their aim. In effect, what we have, anyone who deserves this name." 11 What
then, are works that have, as their under- we have here, therefore, is the same forma-
lying purpose, the delineation of the image tion of words that formulates what Machia-
of a book as book, not to be used but rather velli likewise declares about his own book
to be read "per diletto" as Dante's Paolo in the dedication of The Prince: "as I de-
and Francesca do in their reading of their sire no honor for my work but such as the
book Galeotto. However, unlike Dante's novelty and gravity of its subject may justly
book (Divine Comedy) in which the Paolo deserve."12 In a very profound and uncanny
and Francesca story is indicted as an exam- way these books point to the aesthetic prod-
ple of misreading "per diletto," and unlike uct by pointing to themselves as books.
Petrarca's book (II Canzoniere) in which he Hence their real value rests in their very
deliberately stages his own "giovanil er- "novelty and gravity"-the power to per-
rore," namely his own treatment of his suade and ultimately arrest the viewer's at-
"idolo," Laura, as the necessary sin for the tention upon themselves.
conception of poetic autonomy, The Cour- The phenomenon of granting autonomy
tier and The Prince dispense altogether to the aesthetic product starts as a hypothe-
with the need to come to terms with "sin" sis during the early Quattrocento and be-
as the "pretext" for literary creation. comes so refined that by the time it reaches
The point I wish to make from these in- the early Cinquecento, it is formulaic, a
troductory remarks is that as emblematic settled thesis. What becomes the "given"
examples, these two most influential books concerning the autonomy theory of art in
have achieved fame and continue to com- the hands of a Machiavelli, a Castiglione,
mand a sizeable readership because the con- an Ariosto, a Michelangelo, or a Raphael,
tent matter which they purport to discuss- in the period of its inception was, and could
how to form a perfect courtier-prince-is only be, a hypothetical experiment of the
really besides the point, itself an irrelevant theory itself. In this paper I would like to
issue, especially for our modern democratic suggest that such a theory had its best pro-
ideologies. The real point of these two posal in the principle and experiment of
books is, if we wish, their very "irrelevance" one-point perspective.
as "useful" books which makes them rele- But before we enter the issue in question,
vant to a modern theory of aesthetics. The I would like to point out that the scope
fact that these two books have little, if any, of this study is not to recover the issue of
"practical" value as manuals to be applied, perspective historically, or we might say,
yet continue to be taught today mainly in archeologically.13 My intent is to view the
departments other than literature, and con- question of perspective as a cultural phe-
tinue to be catalogued in most libraries, one nomenon, or more appropriately, as a
under political science and the other under "Kairotic" event that issues forth a specific
social science, is but further proof of their theory of aesthetics that stakes a claim to
idolatrous power to be taken for other than revolutionize the very issue of artistic cre-
what they signify, i.e., literature. One only ation. Simply put, this claim is to challenge
needs look at Castiglione's preface where he the theory which held the artist to be, in
refers to his work as "these books of the some mysterious way, a creator, one who

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Alberti and Framing of Perspective
allows the arts "not simply [to] imitate what
they see but reascend to those principles
(Aoyot) from which Nature herself is de-
rived." 14
What seems to be apparent is that the
question no longer is one of either purely
creating, or merely rediscovering the prin-
ciples that govern Nature herself. The strat-
egy is one of coupling these two acts to come
up with the hybrid result of "inventing,"
an act (in-venire) that literally "comes-up"
with a product that displaces and blurs the
ontological distinction between the act of
creating with that of producing, as Web-
ster's Dictionary likewise does when it de-
fines "invent" as "to create or produce for
the first time."15
Now, the theme of persuading and direct-
ing attention is the avowed aim of the prin-
ciple of perspective. The discovery of one-
point or central perspective in the first quar-
ter of the fifteenth century, offers a fascinat-
ing model for the formulation of an aes-
thetic theory whose very identity insists on
committing what from an Augustinian per-
spective would be termed an idolatrous act
of pointing back to itself and seeking self-
justification.16
II
Leon Battista Alberti (1404-1472), perhaps
more than any other, poses himself as what
we moderns would call a "genius," that is,
a creative mind who succeeds, as Machia-
velli will declare in Chapter IV of his
Prince, "a introdurre nuovi ordini." 17 Per-
haps it is this quality or attribute that led
Burkhardt and most modern critics of the
Renaissance to bestow on Alberti the status
of the "universal man." 18 It is fascinating,
not to say puzzling, however, to recall that
most critics continue to regard Alberti as a
genius, a universal man, not so much for
his "artistic" merits, but moreso for his
theoretical and technical achievements. Al-
berti was indeed a man of many virtues and
talents, but an "artist" he was not.
On this specific point it is pertinent to
remember that Alberti's "artistic" claim to
fame is based largely on his being an archi-
tect, and that he did, after all, dedicate his
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
31
book On Painting (1435) to another archi-
tect, Filippo Brunelleschi. Now an "archi-
tect," at least etymologically, is primarily
and chiefly a builder apxrt- KTWVchief-
builder), a profession whose claim is essen-
tially technical, only indirectly "artistic."
Hence, there is something both curious and
incongruous about this judgment. Why does
our "modern" culture which is so sensitive
to and anxious to protect the purity of
aesthetics, select essentially a "theoretician-
technician" as the symbol of "universality"?
Are we still so Crocean as to think that art
must belong to the category of "pure aes-
thetics"? In that case, Alberti can only be
judged as a grand "craftsman." Or rather,
is the category of "craftsmanship" itself in
question as it relates to the problem of aes-
thetics?19
I believe that it is safe to say that the
fundamental strategy of the Renaissance,
as related to art, was to form an ideology
that sought to grant autonomous value to
a whole series of disciplines, each of which
from a medieval perspective had only served
as "handmaids" of theology. To state it in
theological terms, the strategy is to convert
and give iconic value to what from a me-
dieval perspective would have been taken
as idolatrous. To produce a work of art in
the Renaissance is to blur the outlines that
distinguish idol from the icon-or to put it
in Augustine's terms, it is to confuse the
categories of uti and frui, that is, things
which are to be used and things which are
to be enjoyed.20 Since only God can be en-
joyed, all other things that claim enjoyment
for their own sake, are therefore idolatrous,
or sinful. Translating theology into semi-
otics, it could be said that things are to the
former what signs are to the latter. Simply
put, signs, like things, both are and mean.
The failure to keep and retain the distinc-
tion is nothing but the sin of idolatry, i.e.,
the sin of surface reading, or more appro-
priately, the mistake of literal reading.
When the viewer "falls" for the illusion
exercized by the perspective principle he is
deceived into thinking that he is piercing
the sign (the painting) when, in fact, he is
but a subject of literal reading. An inter-
esting parallel case of the deception of lit-
 32 P ROCACCINI

eral reading can be seen in the story of the the "manipulative" factor primary value,
Fat Carpenter (Grasso legnaiuolo) by An- for it is not the mere giving of form that
tonio Manetti.21 Such is so because the art- is at stake but the tactical "how" of the
ist has managed to produce the illusion of doing that constitutes the operative princi-
transparency in the opacity of the sign. The ple of the age. The "means" in its relation
moment the viewer experiences immediate to the "end" is abolished as such and is
enjoyment, or he reads "per diletto," he given the new diplomatic status for not only
becomes nothing short of a victim of the affecting but also determining the worth of
fetish power of the aesthetic element. It is its own virtue.
precisely toward the effect of aesthetic de- The implications are far-reaching, espe-
light that Augustine directs his indictment cially when we consider that the most rele-
of his "eyes" for taking "delight in beauti- vant qualities operating in the Renaissance
ful shapes of different and bright and at- mind-cleverness, cunning, wit, ingenuity,
tractive colors"22 as well as his "ears" which become valuable attributes in themselves,
are moved more by the singing than by the transcending their mere functionality for
"meaning of the words when they are sung. gaining or retaining power. To confer upon
"23 the "means" an "end" value is to offer the
Hence, the ideology that governs the Ren- mediating factor primary status and hence
aissance is therefore primarily based on a grant it constitutive power. From an ideo-
strategy to convert and render autonomous logical perspective the result of such an op-
that which previously was treated as ancil- eration proclaims the fact that the Renais-
lary or supplementary, or, idolatrous. The sance artist succeeds in formulating the end
aim of the ideology is to produce a work product out of his own making and for his
of "art," and justify it as such, by invoking own doing.
a technical know-how, a science. The em- However, it is important to re-define
phasis is clearly on the "making," on "arte- words like "making" and "doing" and to
fare."24 not interpret them strictly as functional
Now the aim of controlled perspective, as categories. By this I do not mean to imply
Alberti treats it, is to effectively reproduce that these categories cease to function as
what is present to the eye, as he so states in "means"; rather, they are supplemented by
Book I: "The painter is concerned solely a new feature, that of the technique itself.
with representing what can be seen."25 In By claiming scientific status the techne
other words, Alberti's preoccupation is with achieves ontological value.27 Hence, when
visual appearance and how such an appear- Alberti writes that the aim of perspective
ance can be effectively rendered. This is the painting is to treat a two-dimensional pic-
central issue of his treatise. His taking on ture plane as if it were a window in which
such an issue, however, involves not only a three-dimensional scene appears, we un-
the mimetic axiom for depicting reality, derstand the window metaphor to be a cog-
"the imitation of nature", as Cennini, for nitive metaphor for ordering and giving
one, had already declared back in 1390, but, form to a mode of perception that is still
more significantly, a "science" of art, a used in today's vocabulary when we equate
"technical" operation.26 understanding with "putting something in
Whether the subject matter is painting, perspective."
architecture, or the education and forma- The metaphysical value of the window
tion of the family, Alberti consistently ap- metaphor stresses a mode of outlining and
proaches the question as an operation that "defining" reality in terms of visual repre-
is governed by a plan and one which is to sentation, that is to say, that what is being
be executed in a determined way. The fin- viewed is represented with objectivity and
ished product is to be regarded as the com- certainty. This is, of course, the basis of the
pletion and the realization of an activity science of mimesis, the faithful representa-
that has conferred form, one that has shaped tion of the natural. However, we recall that
matter. The stratagem is, therefore, to give the theory of mimesis at work in the Ren-

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Alberti and Framing of Perspective
aissance is not itself a faithful imitation of
the classical Aristotelian theory, where mim-
esis was not simply an imitation of "na-
ture," but more specifically, a re-presenta-
tion of an ethos, that is, an imitation of how
nature operates. Renaissance theories con-
cerning the principle of imitation go be-
yond the classical notion by reformulating
the theory itself.
The general thrust of Book II in On
Painting is towards interpreting the creative
process inherent in nature herself: "Since
Nature has carried the measurements to a
mean, there is not a little unity in recog-
nizing them. Serious painters will take this
task on themselves from nature. They will
put as much study and work into remember-
ing what they take from nature as they do
in discovering it" (73). In the next century,
Leonardo will be even more emphatic:
"Those who took as their standard anything
other than nature, the supreme guide of
the masters, were wearying themselves in
vain."28 In Leonardo, the advice has ac-
quired a reproachful moral tone; in Alberti
it appears to be merely a natural directive:
"He who dares take everything he fashions
from nature will make his hand so skilled
that whatever he does will always appear
to be drawn from nature. ... So great is
the force of anything drawn from nature.
For this reason always take from nature that
which you wish to paint . .." (p. 94). The
use of Nature as a model to imitate together
with the application of the newly discovered
mathematical/geometric technique for de-
picting what is present to the eye, constitute
the theoretical basis for the "new" science
of art.
The coincidence of the mimetic principle
with that of a scientific principle brings
forth the possibility that Nature can be both
perceived as well as comprehended. How-
ever, it is the discovery of the one-point
perspective that allows for the convergence
of these two principles. The common point
serves to provide both the focal point of
the composition towards which every line
and plane recede to form the unified space
as well as the cultural point for equating
"art" and "science."29 Alberti, who claims
to be dealing with "a subject never before
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
33
treated . . ." (p. 43) is faced with the task
of not only providing "perfect skill and
knowledge in painting" (p. 40) but, more
importantly, providing a theory of art for
"justifying" the role of the artist. At the
beginning of Book III he states: "I say the
function of the painter is this: to describe
with lines and to tint with color on what-
ever panel or wall is given him similar ob-
served planes of any body so tllat a certain
distance and in a certain position from the
center they appear in relief, seem to have
mass and to be lifelike. The aim of paint-
ing: to give pleasure, good will and fame
to the painter more than riches. If painters
will follow this, their painting will liold
the eyes and soul of the observer" (p. 89).
This paragraph contains, in nuce, the
basic "program" for art, as Alberti devises
it and the Renaissance will practice it. The
discovery and application of the central per-
spective principle, as codified by Alberti,
provides what Rudolf Arnheim describes
as "the fascinating spectacle of the human
mind groping for the solution of a visual
problem.. ."30
III
It is the "visual problem" as a cultural
expression, or we might say, as a signifier,
that is significan'tand unique in the Renais-
sance. Perspective painting, namely the ef-
fective rendering of the third dimension,
that of depth, discloses a technical mode
of representation in which artificial signs-
those produced by man, are to pass as natu-
ral signs.
As a theoretical debate, the insistence on
using nature and the classics as models is the
first and most important claim for ground-
ing the new theory. As signs, both nature
and the classics function as ultimate authori-
ties. Perceived as natural signs, they have
no referential value other than pointing to
themselves. In other words, natural signs
function and serve to negate meaning itself;
they simply are. Their authority is legiti-
mized precisely in the fact that they simply
are, that they do not depend on a transcen-
dental claim other than their own internal
laws. Nature thus provides a reading of
 34 PROCACCINI

signs as simply that, entities void of any and the description of the matter, I would
meaning. The classics, on the other hand, suggest that istoria be taken as the govern-
demonstrate how to neutralize man's own ing principle for determining the meaning
appropriation of natural signs in order to of a painting and its relation to the "real-
make them appear as such. The gesture is ity" it claims to re-present.
one of concealing the means employed to Istoria is an ambiguous term, just like its
transform a natural sign into an artificial modern Italian equivalent, storia, for both
one so that it may, in turn, present itself have within them the conflicting duality
to be "natural." However, the process of that in English, at least linguistically, is
reproducing a sign whose function is that resolved by dividing "history" from "story."
of appearing to be natural also entails the To define istoria, then, means essentially
hiding of the "why" such a technique is to form a frame, which like a frame around
devised in the first place. Ironically enough, a painting, serves the double role of distin-
it is the hidden factor that becomes, at least guishing the story (fiction) from history
ideologically, the most revealing sign of its (reality out there), as well as insuring the
intent. autonomy of the story itself precisely be-
The question that remains open is, then, cause it is fiction, and therefore an end in
why does the Renaissance culture insist on itself. Curiously enough, the term istoria
producing what might be simply called nat- embodies the very duality present in its very
ural symbols,31 namely images whose pur- nature as a term, taking it specificially to
pose is, on the one hand, to appear natural, be termine in the Italian sense of meaning
on the other, to reveal by its very technique both an end-term-confining/defining, as
the ability to disguise the process for achiev- well as a boundary line that allows passage
ing such an effect. While the Renaissance from one state to another. Istoria thus func-
artist works at concealing the process by tions both to establish its own difference as
which he arrives at the imitative represen- fiction, as well as its fictional identity as
tation, it is that very process which ends up reality. In the first instance, istoria, like
being the "subject" of the painting. The termine as end, carries the confined mean-
demonstration of the technique is rewarded ing conveyed by the word "quadratura"
by admiration even more than the ostensi- which Vincenzo Foppa will in 1468 use in
ble subject matter of the painting. It is no the sense of what today we mean when we
mere accident, for example, that Alberti say "framing reality," or as Alberti says
turns to the figures of the poet and the when he introduces the term "circumscrip-
orator as the proper company for paint- tion," that is, "an outline with a line" to
ers: "Therefore, I advise that each painter describe space. In the second instance, where
should make himself familiar with poets, the fiction poses and claims itself to be "re-
rhetoricians, and others equally well learned ality," istoria, like termine as boundary,
in letters. They will give new inventions or conveys the meaning that the Italian word
at least aid in beautifully composing the for frame, "cornice" carries, that is, essen-
istoria through which the painter will sure- tially an embellishment that serves to blur
ly acquire much praise and renown in his more than to distinguish the fiction from
painting" (p. 91). Although Alberti is per- reality.
suasive enough to convince his readers that The presence of a frame on a Renaissance
to follow his instructions will assure them painting, like the so-called "frame" around
praise and fame, yet no where do we ever the Boccaccian tales, is clearly a sign that
find any reference as to why this technique is meant to set the painting apart from real-
will, in fact, insure such success. ity. As a sign, the frame assumes the analo-
For our purposes, perhaps part of the an- gous function of the chorus in a Greek
trag-
swer lies in his treatment of what he terms edy, namely that of
reminding the onlooker
the istoria, what for Alberti constitutes "the that what is
being witnessed is, in fact, a
greatest work of the painter" (p. 70). Now, fiction, and that the fiction is indeed related
rather than taking the conventional mean- and points to a
reality beyond the frame.
ing of istoria, that is, the subject matter In this sense, the first examples of Renais-

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Alberti and Framing of Perspective
sance painting, those whose subject matter
remained religious, depended on the frame
to remind the viewer that the image of
Christ or that of the Madonna was and re-
mained only an image. Once the painting
was dislodged from its "natural" habitat,
the frame was introduced in order to re-
place the church as the sign that contextual-
ized the image and reminded the viewer
that the image could not possibly claim any
iconographic status. The image, like the
"letter," assumes its meaning only because
it points beyond itself to a realm of the
"spirit" whose ultimate reference could only
be God. The frame clearly indicates that
what is contained within it is meant to be
read allegorically, that the signs represented
within it both are and mean. In this regard,
one might consider, for example, the con-
troversy surrounding the interpretation of
images during the Reformation, when it
might be suggested that the issue is also a
debate concerning how the frame as much
as the painting is interpreted. At any rate,
what we are intimating here is simply that
the frame establishes the identity of the fic-
tion by differentiating it from its outer ref-
erence.
Taken as such, Renaissance art only re-
elaborates the long-standing mimetic theory
that art is but a metonymic representation
at least once-removed from that which origi-
nally it was supposed to re-present. The fic-
tion can never disclaim its own fictionality.
The uniqueness of the perspective principle,
and thus of Renaissance theory as a whole,
lies in the claim that fiction, in fact, can
simultaneously claim and disclaim its own
fictionality. How this is achieved, it seems
to me, is directly related to the principle
governing one-point perspective. As we have
said, the aim of this principle is to re-create
a sense of a unified self-enclosed space-a
convincing illusion within the frame. Its
claim is not that what is depicted within the
frame mirrors and therefore equals what is
being represented outside of it. The claim
is of another order. Graphically perceived,
the interest is not in relating the fiction
contiguously with what lies on the other
side of the frame, the "reality" out there
beyond the frame but rather with meta-
phorically projecting "reality" behind but
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
35
within the frame. It is the so-called third
dimension, that of depth, that governs the
fiction. The persuasive illusion created by
the depth dimension has the differentiating
function of revealing itself to be an end-
product, a result of a process whose very
aim is to reveal the very technique that suc-
ceeded in producing it.
Like a text enclosed within its covers, so,
too, a painting enclosed within its frame is
not what it indicates, but simply a vehicle
that indicates what is not there, that which
is absent. Alberti again offers the idea when
he states "painting contains a divine force
which not only makes absent men present,
. . but moreover, makes the dead seem
almost alive" (p. 70). In other words, ac-
cording to the principle of perspective,
painting, and therefore art, is explicitly a
lie by its own admission. However it must
be specified that it is a lie not because it
is unfaithful to what it claims to represent
but rather because it is irrelevant. Its mean-
ing is precisely its irrelevancy since its ref-
erentiality is nothing but the projected "re-
ality" of the artist himself. Such a projected
meaning, however, is possible only if the
illusion is capable of arresting the eye of
the viewer.
Controlling the eyes by the infinite yet
indefinite track of recession working behind
the frame, the imaginative point at the cen-
ter prevents the lateral move that would
lead to the frame and eventually to "real-
ity" adjacent to it.
However, let us return to words like
istoria, termine, and cornice, taking them
now to mean boundary categories. Apply-
ing this meaning to perspective painting
as it would relate to the depth dimension
only reinforces the attractive power of the
"point" which pulls and confines our atten-
tion, which for Augustine is the cause of
sensual pleasure. Alberti is clear in his in-
tentions with regard to this point: "If paint-
ers will follow this (rules governing paint-
ing), their painting will hold the eyes and
soul of the observer" (p. 63).
Viewed projectively, the various levels of
spatial entities slide into each other because
what separates them are boundary terms,
unlike the lines of demarcation formed by
the enclosing frame. It should be under-
 36
lined, however, that the direction in which
the process moves is recessional and not lat-
eral. An effective example of what I would
call the "sliding" principle can be illus-
trated by the so-called figurative "frames"
within the material frame itself. For in-
stance, just to take one exemplary painting
like St. Jerome in his Study by Antonello
da Messina, the function of frame structures
such as doorways, windows, walls, arches,
within the painting serve as invitations to
enter and pursue the line of direction with-
in the depth dimension of the painting.
They invite and, at the same time, channel
our entrance into the fictional world of the
painting. In short, we might say that while
the actual frame serves literally to distin-
guish art from reality, the "fictional" frame
serves literally to blur the two categories.
As a sign to be read in cultural terms,
it is of interest to read the symbolic value
of a frame, especially when contrasted with
its symbolic absence in much of modern
art. One needs only to think of Magritte,
as an example of a modern painter, to see
how the semantics of the frame has under-
gone a complete metamorphosis.
In Magritte's painting, Euclidean Walks
(1955), the absence of the fictional frame on
the painting is underscored by the fact that
the painting within the painting is placed
so as to coincide with the "reality" it is rep-
resenting, and this absence provides a sign
that halts the viewer from continuing to
view in the projective direction. The pres-
ence of the easel upon which the painting
rests, together with the exposed view of only
one side of the painted canvas is meant to
draw our attention away from the fiction as
much as towards the fact that the actual
painting is likewise frameless. The absence
of both the metaphorical and literal frame
therefore is meant to convey that the dis-
tinction between fiction and reality, as in
a Pirandello play, is pretty indistinguish-
able.
The convincing effect of the illusion cre-
ated by central perspective in the Renais-
sance pulls us into a world that is meant
to deceive us into making the eye believe
that what appears to be is indeed what it
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
PROCACCINI
claims to be-at least until our eyes meet
the frame, at which point we are once again
reminded that the fiction is indeed only
that. The point to be emphasized here is
that the fictional world of the painting is
such that in its power to be persuasive it
can both deceive the viewer into that world
of its make believe, while at the same time
declaring the illusion of the fiction. How-
ever, it is the presence of the frame and
its reminders that make us aware that the
illusion we have just experienced is nothing
but the property of man's own making. But
to reproduce effectively the "natural" effect,
the artist must know how to neutralize the
very act of making.
Beginning perhaps with Brunelleschi's fa-
mous experiment with the painted panels
of the Baptistery and Palazzo Vecchio at the
beginning of the Quattrocento, and ending
with the so-called converging style of the
Renaissance, as defined by Wblfflin, as it
gradually gives way to the explosive style
of the Mannerist-Baroque period, Renais-
sance art lays the foundation for all succeed-
ing theories regarding the autonomous na-
ture of art. By drawing the equation sign
between the artist and artifact, a circular
motion is formed which informs all subse-
quent aesthetic theories that the value of art
cannot be measured by its relation to "real-
ity" but rather should be measured by its
relation to its creator.
This mirror-relationship-artist-art-is
what constitutes the self-contained and au-
tonomous value of the new art theory. The
narcissistic pattern is clearly and consciously
inherent in the strategy: the artist who cre-
ates his work which, in turn, will grant him
fame. "Therefore, painting contains within
itself the virtue that any master painter who
sees his work adored will feel himself con-
sidered another god" (p. 64). And if per-
chance the reader has missed the point, in
the very same paragraph Alberti adds: "I
say among my friends that Narcissus who
was changed into a flower, according to the
poets, was the inventor of painting. Since
painting is already the flower of every art,
the story of Narcissus is most to the point.
What else can you call painting but a simi-
Alberti and Framing of Perspective
lar embracing with art of what is presented
on the surface of the water in the fountain"
(p. 64)?
As an aesthetic principle, one-point per-
spective mirrors the very aim that the paint-
er sets out to accomplish with his work, as
Alberti declares: "The aim of painting: to
give pleasure, good will and fame to the
painter more than riches" (p. 89). In other
words, by foreclosing referential meaning
together with enclosing its own self-referen-
tiality, the Renaissance establishes a radi-
cal break with the past, and does establish,
to paraphrase Machiavelli's words, "a new
'ordering' of things."32 This is, we might
say, the rhetoric of so-called "realism," or
as Roland Barthes would say, "l'effet de
reel,"33 that technique or style that will
prevail in the world of art until its climax
in the nineteenth century.
The point of the realistic technique, like
the point of perspective, is to restrict the
very meaning of the act of interpretation.
The technique is to invent a fiction that
claims to be nonfiction. The art of realism
that is based on the principles of perspective
is out to create nothing less than the illusion
of interpretation on the pretext that the
pre-text is a documented reality. The prin-
ciple of one-point perspective, then, signals
an "event" in our cultural history when a
radical transformation of symbolic thinking
takes root.34Man's central point of reference
undergoes a critical shift, and thus, the very
issue of "decentering" man's criterion for
judging his own position.
IV
This Renaissance theory of art dissolves
the theological framework governing man's
centripetal hold on reality. What is wit-
nessed is a new theory, a theory that substan-
tivally pre-figures those practical "revolu-
tions" of the next five centuries.35One-point
perspective de-centers the classical, medieval
geo-centric stance and replaces it with the
"modern" ego-centric posture that will be
explicitly "proven" by such revolutionary
figures as Copernicus, Descartes, Vico, Dar-
win, and Freud. Shifting the notion of cen-
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
trality means, therefore, that the concept it-
self is displaced from a material to a mental
location. In the process, the theory of per-
spective becomes an active agent in rees-
tablishing, via the mind, the lost centrality
of the body. Critics of the Renaissance, like
the Renaissance thinkers themselves, are
proud to credit the Renaissance for the
individual merit of having given new breath
to the concept of individualism. Might it
not be also the point to interpret this ges-
ture as an act of "sprezzatura"in order to
conceal the consciousness of the individual's
displacement from a condition in which he
once was, individuus (indivisible) to one in
which he now is, in-dividuus (in-division).
This interpretation would seem to lend
support to Alberti's quasi cynical philoso-
phy of his later years: ". .. I have learned
now to adopt my views to the prevailing
superstitions, my zeal to caprice, and to
frame all my words so as to be capable of
deception."36 It thus seems that the shift
is nothing but the enunciation of the aware-
ness of the distance separating the individ-
ual from the cosmos. The myth of Prome-
theus, as the Renaissance interprets it,37 is
but the sign of the revised myth of the indi-
vidual, the man-making artist who is en-
dowed with power to figure-out and give
form and "new-life" to what Petrarca de-
clares in the very first poem of his "rime
sparse": "quand'era in parte altr'uom da
quel ch'i sono."38
To sum up, we might say that one-point
perspective initiated an aesthetic tradition
whose originality was grounded in its claim
to be scientific, that is, to be conscious of
what one was doing, and to be aware of
the laws governing the formulation of art
as it, in turn, governs the "framing of real-
ity." As a theory of art, it must wait for the
Cezannes, the Flauberts, and the Nietzsches
of the nineteenth century to dispell its "ego-
istic" illusion, while at the same time it
must be acknowledged that they, ironically
enough, are but the inheritors who fulfill
the very aesthetic claim underlying perspec-
tive art, that theory otherwise known as
"art for art's sake."
 38
1 Baldassare
Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier,
tr. Charles S. Singleton (Garden City, N.Y., 1959),
p. 43.
2 Ibid.
3 Ovid, Metamorphoses, tr. Rolfe
Humphries (In-
diana University Press, 1968), p. 242, Is. 254-55.
4Castiglione, p. 43.
5 Ibid.
Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince and the Dis-
courses, ed. Max Lerner (New York, 1950), p. 56.
7The two classic studies on the general subject
still remain Anthony Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy,
1450-1600 (Oxford, 1963), and Rensselaer W. Lee,
Ut Pictura Poesis: The Humanistic Theory of Paint-
ing (New York, 1967). As theoretical issue dealing
with this specific question as it relates to "art" I have
in mind three distinct yet complementary texts:
Susanne Langer, Feeling and Form (New York, 1953),
E. H. Gombrich, Art and Illusion (Princeton Uni-
versity Press, 1960), and Paul de Man, Blindness and
Insight (Oxford University Press, 1971).
81 would like to specify here when I use the word
"ideology" I employ it d la Kenneth Burke when he
refers to its primary sense: "the study of ideas and
their relation to one another." Kenneth Burke, A
Rhetoric of Motives (University of California Press,
1969), p. 53. For the question of perspective within
the more conventional meaning of ideology see
Arturo Carlo Quintavalle, Prospettiva e Ideologia:
Alberti e la cultura del secolo XV (Parma, 1967).
The work that best relates to my meaning of ideol-
ogy is Michael Baxandall, Painting and Experience
in Fifteenth Century Italy (Oxford, 1974).
9For the implications of this theory as it relates
to the spectator/reader, see the classic W. K. Wimsatt,
Jr., The Verbal Icon (Lexington, Ky., 1954).
10
Castiglione, p. 1.
UIbid., p. 25.
2 Machiavelli,
p. 4.
ls For this approach see the well-informed Samuel
Y. Edgerton, Jr., The Renaissance Rediscovery of
Linear Perspective (New York, 1975).
14 Owen Barfield, Saving the Appearances: A Study
in Idolatry (London, 1957), p. 128.
15For the philosophical implication of such a
"strategy" one might turn to Derrida and read the
move as a "strategem." See Derrida's "The Supple-
ment of Copula: Philosophy before Linguistics,"
Textual Strategies, ed. Josue V. Harari (Cornell
University Press, 1979).
16On the matter of justification, see William M.
Ivins, Jr., On the Rationalization of Sight: With an
Examination of Three Renaissance Texts on Per-
spective (New York, 1938).
17
Machiavelli, p. 21.
18 The most recent and very informative work on
Alberti as a "universal man" is Joan Gadol, Leon
Battista Alberti: Universal Man of the Renaissance
(University of Chicago Press, 1969). As it relates to
this paper, see in particular Chapter 2 or 3.
19For contrast between art and craft I have in
mind the argument by R. G. Collingwood, The
Principles of Art (London, 1948). Also see John
This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
PROCACCINI
Hospers, "The Croce-Collingwood Theory of Art,"
Philosophy, vol. XXXI (October, 1956), 291-308.
20Saint Augustine, De Doctrina Christiana, I,
iii-v.
21 See
Emily Jayne, "Brunelleschi and the Story of
the Fat Carpenter", M.A. Thesis, UCLA, 1972.
2 Saint
Augustine, Confessions, tr. R. S. Pine-
Coffin (Harmondsworth, England, 1961), p. 239 (Book
10, Chapter 34).
23Ibid., p. 238 (Book 10, Chapter 33). For an in-
sightful discussion on Augustine's meaning of signs,
see R. A. Markus, "St. Augustine on Signs" and B.
Darrell Jackson, "The Theory of Signs in St. Augus-
tine's De Doctrina Christiana," both in Augustine,
ed. R. A. Markus (New York, 1972).
24Specifically as a theoretical issue, see Jacques
Maritain, Creative Intuition in Art and Poetry (New
York: 1953), especially Chapter II, "Art as a Virtue
of the Practical Intellect." As an applied issue, spe-
cifically dealing with the Renaissance, see Charles S.
Singleton, "The Perspective of Art," in The Kenyon
Review, XV (Spring, 1953).
25Leon Battista Alberti, On Painting, tr. John R.
Spencer (Yale University Press, 1973), p. 43. Hence-
forth, all page numbers from On Painting will
follow the quotations.
23 For a history of the development of Renaissance
perspective see especially Chapters VII and VIII in
John White, The Birth and Rebirth of Pictorial
Space (New York, 1967). Also see Adrian Stokes, Art
and Science: A Study of Alberti, Piero della Fran-
cesca and Giorgione (London, 1949).
27For a review of the ontological status of the
work of art see R. Hoffman, "Conjectures and Refu-
tations on the ontological Status of the Work of
Art," Mind, vol. LXXI (October, 1962), and R.
Ruder, "The Ontological Status of the Aesthetic
Object," Phil. and Phen. Res., Vol. X (March, 1950).
28See the chapter on the artist's life, Irma Rich-
ter, ed., Selections from the Notebooks of Leonardo
da Vinci (Oxford University Press, 1977).
29It is most interesting that in the most "famous"
study on perspective, Alessandro Parronchi, Studi su
la dolce Prospettiva (Milano, 1964), the author be-
gins his voluminous work by referring to and citing
a modern dictionary definition of perspective "Sci-
enza o arte di rappresentare su una superficie piana
la forma, il contorno, e il rilievo dei corpi in modo
che sembrino veduti a una distanza e in una data
posizione" (p. 3). While it is ironically poignant that
Parronchi turns to a dictionary to initiate his "his-
tory" of perspective, it is moreso poignantly ironic
that such a definition is still subject to the spell of
the "story" of perspective, i.e., is it science or art?
8 Rudolf Arnheim, Art and Visual Perception:
A Psychology of the Creative Eye (University of Cal-
ifornia, 1969), p. 277.
31For more on this subject, see Mary Douglas,
Natural Symbols (New York, 1973).
32For a provocative analysis of the autoreflexive
poetic as it applies to perhaps the "inventor" of the
theory see John Freccero, "The Fig Tree and the
Laurel: Petrarch's Poetics," Diacritics, V (Spring,
1975).
A lberti and Framing of Perspective
3Roland Barthes, "L'Effet de Reel," Communi-
cations (SEUIL), No. 11 (1968), 84-89.
4 See especially Erwin Panofsky, "Die Perspeck-
tive als 'symbolische Form'," Vortrage der Biblio-
thek Warburg: 1924-1925 (Leipzig, 1927), pp. 258-
331; Ernest Cassirer, The Philosophy of Symbolic
Forms, ed. Charles W. Hendel, 3 vols. (New Haven:
1955); and Carl H. Hamburg, Symbol and Reality
(The Hague: 1956).
6 The most penetrating study of the subject is
still, I feel, the important work of Alexandre Koyre,
From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe
(Johns Hopkins University Press, 1970).
39
36 Leon Battista
Alberti, Momus, sive De principe,
cited in the very stimulating chapter "Interpreta-
tions of the Renaissance," Eugenio Garin, Science
and Civic Life in the Italian Renaissance (New
York), pp. 6-7.
37See the classic work on the
subject of the indi-
vidual, Ernst Cassirer, The Individual and the
Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy (University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1963). On the question of Pro-
metheus, see especially Chapter 3, "Freedom and
Necessity in the Philosophy of the Renaissance."
38F. Petrarch, Sonnets and Songs, tr. Anna Maria
Armi (New York, 1968), p. 2.

This content downloaded from 132.170.219.53 on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 11:43:27 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions