کارآمدی خط افق در سازمان یابی فضا و بازنمایی عمق صحنه در نقاشی ایرانی (برپایه آثار ایلخانی تا پیدایی فرنگی سازی) (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
حافظه دیداری بیننده امروز، مهم ترین کارکرد خط افق را سامان دهی خطوط فضاساز و جای دادن نقطه گریز (VP) در نقاشی می داند. از آن جا که، نقاشی ایرانی فاقد نقطه گریز به شیوه غربی است، کارکرد خط افق در آن محل پرسش است. شاید بپنداریم خط افق در نگاره های ایرانی، نقش موثری در ژرفانمایی و انسجام فضای تصویر ندارد، درحالی که واکاوی آثار از سده های گوناگون آشکار می کند، این خط به گونه ای متفاوت بر روند سامان بخشیِ فضایی و ژرفانمایی تاثیر داشته است. مهم ترین کارآمدی ترسیم خط افق در نقاشی ایرانی، مرزبندیِ دورترین نقطه قابل دید سطح زمین، جهت سامان دهی چینش های گوناگون ترازهای اصلی و فرعی بود. خط افق در جایگاه مرز آسمان/زمین با دور یا نزدیک شدن از کادر پایین نقاشی (نزدیک ترین تراز به بیننده)، گستردگی بصری و دامنه دید بیننده را تعریف می کرد و هنرمند را به شیوه های گوناگونِ ترازبندی و عمق نمایی، البته، متفاوت با هنر غرب تجهیز می ساخت. پژوهش نشان می دهد، کارکرد خط افق در نقاشی ایرانی دست کم در سه سویه دریافت می شود: نخست، نشاندن واقع نمایانه عناصر بصری بر سطح زمین که با تاکید بر مرز آسمان/زمین ممکن می گردد؛ دوم، گسترش میدان دید و عمق تصویر با افزایش فاصله میان دورترین نقطه سطح (خط افق) و نزدیک ترین نقطه (کادر پایین نقاشی)؛ سوم، ایجاد معیاری بصری برای تخمین فاصله میان ترازهای بصریِ میانی در سنجش با تراز افق که ژرف ترین بخش سطح زمین است. به دیگر سخن، جایابی سنجیده خط افق در نگارگری ایرانی، پرداخت نماهای باز (لانگ شات) رزم ها تا ازدحام در فضاهای کم عمق بزم ها را ممکن می سازد. پژوهش حاضر، شیوه ای توصیفی تحلیلی و رویکردی، استقرایی دارد؛ از این رو، با جستجو در شمار قابل اتکایی از نگاره های میانه ایلخانی تا صفویه پیشافرنگی سازی (270 نگاره از 35 نسخه ممتاز) به شناسایی و توصیف نظام سامان دهی فضا در نقاشی ایرانی می پردازد. نمونه های کتابخانه ای (نسخ خطی برخط از مجموعه های مالک) به شیوه هدفمند برگزیده شده است.The Efficiency of the Horizon Line in Organizing the Space and Representing the Depth of the Scene in Persian Painting (Upon Iranian Masterpieces from the 13th to 17th Centuries)
The horizon line is one of the most important elements in landscape paintings, as it demarcates the sky and the ground, organizing all the visual elements logically within the picture, both the sky and the ground sections. Additionally, the horizon line has the most important roles in the advanced paintings, especially after the Renaissance. This line organizes whole the space-making lines on the specific point or points that called VP (i.e., vanishing point). VP is located on the horizon line and it can be one to three points, in which case it is called a single point to three-point perspective. This function of the horizon line is the most well-known function for the audiences since the Renaissance until today. With this understanding of the efficiency of the horizon line, when the contemporary audiences look at the masterpieces of the Persian paintings, they conclude that the horizon line in these paintings had no importance in creating the space and depth of the scenes. Because Persian paintings lack Renaissance-style perspective.The absence of Renaissance perspective in the Persian paintings on the one hand, and the emphasis of 13th - 17th - century Iranian artists on drawing the horizon line in their paintings on the other hand, raises the question that: if the Persian painters, unlike Renaissance artists, did not use the horizon line for organizing perspective in the same way, why did they draw this line in their paintings? In simpler terms, what was the function of the horizon line in the Persian painting? This article aims to answer this question.An examination and analysis of the most prominent paintings from 13th to 17th - century Persian manuscripts, spanning from the Ilkhanid period in Maragheh and Tabriz cities to the middle of the Safavid era in Qazvin, Shiraz and Mashhad cities, reveal that the horizon line had several important functions:1- Logical Placement of Visual Elements on the Ground: The first and perhaps the oldest function of the horizon line is the logical placement of the visual elements of the painting on the ground. When a line is drawn at the farthest visible part of the earth's surface, this line defines the boundary of the earth as well as its boundary with the sky. Consequently, any visual element positioned between this line and the bottom frame of the painting is considered to be located on the ground.2- Increasing the Depth of the Scene by Creating Open Views: In many paintings of the Ilkhanid period (and after), the horizon line is seen as the boundary between the sky and the ground, as well as the last visible layer on the ground's surface. In addition, in these paintings, because they have drawn the horizon line higher than other parts of the ground's surface and sometimes even placed it in the upper half of the painting, therefore, between the farthest visible layer (i.e., the horizon line) and the closest layer to the viewer (i.e., picture frame at the bottom), a surface is created, the most important function of this surface is to increase the depth of the scene up to the horizon line. In paintings that have this style, the background appears to be pushed back. Therefore, these paintings show more depth.3- Increasing Scene Depth by Emphasizing the Organization of the Visual Levels: If the horizon line is the farthest visible place on the ground's surface, the visual level on this line is the deepest/farthest level of the image. In the same way, the painting frame in the lower part is the closest visible place to the viewer, on which the closest visual level is located. Between the deepest/farthest and the closest levels, there are many geometric places, each of which can accommodate a new visual level. By increasing these intermediate visual levels between the painting frame and the horizon line, the viewer perceives the ground's surface wider and the scene with more depth. Therefore, increasing the number of the visual levels means increasing the depth of the scene.4- Diversity in Organizing Visual Levels and Creating Different Depths in the Persian Paintings: The horizon line, by demarcating the deepest part of the land, created an estimate of the distance between the farthest and closest visual layers. These different layers each have a number of human figures or other visual elements of the scene. In this way, six different types of Persian perspective were created in the paintings of the 13th to 17th centuries. Each of these six types had various uses by creating different depths in painting scenes. Iranian painters were very familiar with each of these types and their uses, and based on the narrative of the manuscript that was illustrated, they used any types or a combination of several types. The six types of Persian perspectives are as follows: Implication of Perspective through Depiction of a Crowd: The first method is the representation of people who are standing behind each other and form a crowd. In this method, bodies of the people in the first row cover a large proportion of those standing in the back rows in a way that only the head and sometimes a part of shoulders of these people are visible. Implication of Perspective through Depiction of a Little Number of People: In this position, figures- or objects- placed in the front row are presented in a way which make seeing a larger proportion of the figures on the back row visible; however, the piece of land between them us still not visible. Implication of Perspective through Depiction of Limited or Close-Up Scenes: This method was used by the painters to present a part of a wide scene for instance a festivity held in a Persian garden. It is true that in the example the original scene reminds the immensity of the nature the artist depicted merely a sector of this space. To paint this position, the painters used to place the figures in a way that made seeing the piece of land between them possible. The ratio between the figures’ heights and the length of the ordered and connected land between them matters a lot in the third method. This ratio is the most important difference between the third and the fourth methods. In the third one, the height of the figure is always more than the length of the connected and ordered land and as a result it is always more than one. Implication of Perspective through Depiction of Vast or Long-Shot Scenes: A fourth method was used whenever the artist was willing to show the immensity of the nature which embraced people; for instance, to depict hordes of people in an army and to show its greatness in an unending desert. This method is very close to what has been explained in the third one. The only difference lies in the ration between the heights of the figures and the length of the ordered and connected land. Here the height of the figure is always less than the length of the piece of land between the figures. Therefore, the number of ratios between these two, unlike the number of the last method, is always less than one. Implication of Perspective through the Depiction of Ordered and Connected Bodies: in the fifth method, the artists could separate some phenomena visually by drawing separating layers such as a hill or a big rock, massive trees lush gardens, to name but a few. Along obeying the rules of optics and particular properties, understanding of the fifth method was also dependent on the narrative available in the book. Implication of Perspective through Depiction of Buildings: In the paintings which use the sixth method, the depth of field can be understood based upon the situation of the figures in relation with an architectural structure such as a palace, a mosque, a castle, a house, and alike. The sixth method are contained two sections: Interior and exterior plans.
تبلیغات
