On Reverse Perspectives

We haven’t always had the luxury of thinking of perspective so fluidly. For much of mankind’s existence we only had the perspective of our own two eyes. We were viewing objects as they were in relation to us. Even the first pictures are of objects as we directly see them. Flat, 2D, meant to literally represent something as it appears to us.

We have painters to thank for this change. Instead of representing objects from a singular point of view, they begin to think about other perspectives. Through art we develop the idea that objects existence is not tied to our own, but independent. The meaning of an object becomes separate from our interaction with it. We can represent an item through its associations, not just it’s inherent shape. Form, color, texture is still important, but the idea of an object becomes greater than the tangible object itself. Therefore, how we perceive it doesn’t need to be tied to our physical and natural understanding of it. Sometimes we can even represent an object through another object’s interaction with it. Example: lemons are yellow and round, they’re also sour. We can represent a lemon through its physical shape but also through someone’s face reacting to biting into a small slice. This perspective once again relies on our existence, our experience creates the context and builds meaning.

There are even perspectives that don’t exist. By that I mean, they do not exist in the natural world. Pavel Florensky, a Russian mathematician wrote an essay in the 1920’s on Reverse Perspectives. This piece argues that 14th century art intentionally removes perspective, to create meaning in contexts that could never exist. This is the basis for contemporary British artist David Hockney’s work, which manufactures perspectives that are unnatural. I really enjoyed his most recent exhibit in London, Bigger & Closer (not smaller and further away). Even the title plays with the idea of perspective, a bigger object is perceived as closer to us. Hockney rejects the natural order of things in favor for creating images that play with abstraction.

David Hockney “Large Interior, Los Angeles” (1988)

Hockney isn’t the first. Matisse, Picasso, Van Gogh, Degas and many other big names from the late 19th century used reverse perspectives to challenge meaning. It’s not a new concept, but I think we don’t think about it enough.