|
swings out in front of the white fruit bowl, and the two planes
indicating the top of the table and the hollow of the bowl respectively
turn into separate horizontal planes. The viewer’s perception of this
phenomenon results in part from the ambiguity of the depicted space, in
this case aided by the play of light between the multiple contours of the
objects, and by incorporating the active, sensing, subconsciously creative
participation of the viewer. Far from unique in art, this visual-spatial
effect is characteristic of Skov’s work from this period and was a key
objective of his aesthetic pursuit of a persuasive non-illusionistic
three-dimensionality of objects and space alike.
An example of this
visual trompe d’oeil, is the well
known drawing of a transparent cube which can be seen as a flat geometric
design, or volumetrically as a three-dimensional cube capable of unfolding
into either of two different spatial projections, depending on which edge
is seen as projected forward in the viewer’s mind. This effect is not just
a visual curiosity, of course, but actually demonstrates how spatial
visualization proceeds from visual clues which can be interpreted
ambiguously, so that two or more alternate configurations with equal
validity may result. It is apparently impossible for the human mind to
simultaneously retain the images of any two of these multiple visual
configurations, and for some observers it may even be quite difficult to
convert at will from one perceived spatial configuration to another. These perceptual
spatial options need not be diametrically opposites visually, as in the
example of the inverting cube, and the painter is free build together
several interlocking visual clues that induce spatiality in a preselected
direction without entirely eliminating the need for active viewer
participation in the development of the desired final perception.
Skov realized there
was a need to balance the inherent conflict between providing pictorial
definition and allowing the observer freedom of visualization as a
co-creator of the final image. Finding this balance, the viewer sees the
intended images developing and coming alive within a short period of time,
rather than instantly, evolving from the canvas forward into the room. And,
moreover, instead of a lifeless, objective, hard-edged picture that, once
seen, always remains the same, the painting becomes a subjective
co-creation, a visually challenging refuge for the eye and mind to revisit,
rediscover and re-create.
It is indicative of
just how important Skov considered these issues
of visualization to be, that he developed his own shorthand
terminology to describe and discuss them. In conversations with his family
during the
nineteen-fifties, he would refer to these aspects of his work as
“the
volving object” - the object that in the process of being observed
seems
to evolve into assuming the desired three-dimensional shape - and
“visual persuasiveness”: the degree of powerfulness of visualization
resulting
from a particular depicted object or spatial element in the
painting.
Although collaborative as far as the viewer is concerned, according
to his
|