|
 | The Ryerson Diptych, 1275-1285
|
|
 | Daredevil, 1963
|
|
What
is the rationale behind imagery that is set within boundaries, another
dimension of the 2-D space, next to another?
While it’s something that one may take for granted in the West through
altarpieces and comic books, since I use this approach to imagery I ask in
order to discover an answer or at least some kind of clue. I enjoy placing one image next to another in
different settings to see how the similarities or contrasts sharpen or enhance
the other, but maybe there’s more to it than I realize. So, let’s review those “bounded images” of
diptychs, triptychs, and comic book panels.
Altarpieces
and devotional art are a part of the western religious heritage, particularly
through Christianity. A good example of
this is the 13th century Ryerson diptych, a portable religious
artwork, seeing that it can close and move where it is convenient. Each panel is about 11 x 15 inches, and so
when open it is large enough to gain the attention of the devout when in
prayer.
The
left side portrays Mary with the child Jesus with angels and the donor, the
right side presents the crucifixion with Mary and John the evangelist. There is much to say about this juxtaposition
of two scenes from the life of Christ, from birth to death, but I want to
discuss only the use of the diptych for it.
A
first question would be why not portray all this in one piece? Yes, that can be done, and there are
paintings of this and other periods that present multiple actions within one
2-D space whether it is a mural, painting, or icon. So, is there an advantage to two separate
works bound together?
One
advantage would be the ease of portability and storage, and while closed would
protect both paintings. A second reason,
though not necessarily an advantage, is that the physical division between the
two allows one to concentrate on them separately if desired. Another point of interest is that the
artistic comparison between the two allows the viewer to go back-and-forth to
gain meaning from correlation, without having them collide visually. A final motivation is the narrative view,
wherein the order is clear and there is no ambiguity regarding the place or
time of each event.
This
last item brings us to the comic book page or as in here, the cover. Throughout the comic book the panels bring
the reader through the story in sequence, it has narrative force. As the cover here shows, however, it is also
a way to provide information and allow the viewer to make the connections among
them, whether because of an association or a contrast among the topics. It assists defining figures and actions in
their proper context.
Sometimes
one of these reasons or motivations are the aesthetic support for what I’m
constructing in an image although at other times I’m not sure, honestly, if
there is any particular rationale to it.
So far, it appears to work for my various aims as to what I envision for
the final image effect. And yes, this
connection to devotional art and comic book illustration is not by content,
usually; instead it is the formal structure and effect that they share.