مقالۀ «کارآمدی خط افق در سازمانیابی فضا و بازنمایی عمق صحنه در نقاشی ایرانی (برپایۀ آثار ایلخانی تا پیدایی فرنگیسازی» در نشریۀ جلوه هنر دانشگاه الزهرا منتشر شد.
حافظۀ دیداری بینندۀ امروز، مهمترین کارکرد خط افق را ساماندهی خطوط
فضاساز و جایدادن نقطۀ گریز (VP) در نقاشی میداند. از آنجا که، نقاشی
ایرانی فاقد نقطۀ گریز بهشیوۀ غربی است، کارکرد خط افق در آن محل پرسش
است. شاید بپنداریم خط افق در نگارههای ایرانی، نقش موثری در ژرفانمایی و
انسجام فضای تصویر ندارد، درحالیکه واکاوی آثار از سدههای گوناگون آشکار
میکند، این خط بهگونهای متفاوت بر روند سامانبخشیِ فضایی و ژرفانمایی
تاثیر داشته است. مهمترین کارآمدی ترسیم خط افق در نقاشی ایرانی، مرزبندیِ
دورترین نقطۀ قابل دید سطح زمین، جهت ساماندهی چینشهای گوناگون ترازهای
اصلی و فرعی بود. خط افق در جایگاه مرز آسمان/زمین با دور یا نزدیکشدن از
کادر پایین نقاشی (نزدیکترین تراز به بیننده)، گستردگی بصری و دامنۀ دید
بیننده را تعریف میکرد و هنرمند را به شیوههای گوناگونِ ترازبندی و
عمقنمایی، البته، متفاوت با هنر غرب تجهیز میساخت. پژوهش نشان میدهد،
کارکرد خط افق در نقاشی ایرانی دستکم در سه سویه دریافت میشود: نخست،
نشاندن واقعنمایانۀ عناصر بصری بر سطح زمین که با تاکید بر مرز آسمان/زمین
ممکن میگردد؛ دوم، گسترش میدان دید و عمق تصویر با افزایش فاصله میان
دورترین نقطه سطح (خط افق) و نزدیکترین نقطه (کادر پایین نقاشی)؛ سوم،
ایجاد معیاری بصری برای تخمین فاصلۀ میان ترازهای بصریِ میانی در سنجش با
تراز افق که ژرفترین بخش سطح زمین است. به دیگر سخن، جایابی سنجیدۀ خط افق
در نگارگری ایرانی، پرداخت نماهای باز (لانگشات) رزمها تا ازدحام در
فضاهای کمعمق بزمها را ممکن میسازد. پژوهش حاضر، شیوهای
توصیفیـتحلیلی و رویکردی، استقرایی دارد؛ از اینرو، با جستجو در شمار
قابل اتکایی از نگارههای میانۀ ایلخانی تا صفویه پیشافرنگیسازی (270
نگاره از 35 نسخۀ ممتاز) به شناسایی و توصیف نظام ساماندهی فضا در نقاشی
ایرانی میپردازد. نمونههای کتابخانهای (نسخ خطی برخط از مجموعههای
مالک) بهشیوۀ هدفمند برگزیده شده است.
نگارگری ایرانی؛ خط افق؛ ژرفانمایی؛ عمق صحنه؛ صفحۀ تصویر؛ ترازهای بصری.
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 13
th - 17
th -
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 13
th to 17
th
- 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:
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.
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.
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 13
th to 17
th
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.