European and Persian painting

For the purposes of this discussion, I will ignore the unbelievably beautiful framing device surrounding the Persian miniature. Let me also state at the outset that I know the name of the European painter, and have all kinds of associations with the name, but even if you were to tell me the name of the Persian painter, it would just be a name with no associations other than the fact that it is a Persian name. Since this is not a famous work of this European painter, lets just take this as an example of a “typical” European-style painting, and leave the painter an anonymous representative of the larger culture. The comparison of these images immediately brings forth what is commonly, and rightly, understood to be the major difference between European and Asian art, namely that Asian art is flat on the picture plane, and European art appears three dimensional with a clear sense of perspective.

Notice the ochre accents around the figure… on the rug, hat ornament and belt tassels. The light blue on the hat is very dramatic in this palette, not occurring elsewhere in the picure. The white skin tones, which would not have this kind of force on an all-white drawing, give a very delicate feeling. Notice the light-gold bird pattern on the red garment of the figure.

Notice that the cube on which the characters sit does not conform to the perspective of the surrounding environment…perspective is implied, but not performed. By far the most effective aspect of the European painting is its use of light and shadow. The highlights on the velvet are the most dramatic use of this technique. This use of light and shadow on the velvet is quite closely observed from optical reality to the point that if we copied and pasted it into a photograph, we might not notice that the velvet was from a painting. This, however, is the only part of the picture that is remotely photographic. If you look at the trees, for instance, they are every bit as schematic as the vegetal imagery in the Persian miniature. Look closely at the figuration of the breast, neck and head area. Not even close to reality. I am not saying this as a criticism, I am merely saying that the successful illusion of light and shadow in the clothing makes us believe that the figuration of the body must be believable.

The Persian miniature, on the other hand, avoids this kind of inelegance by schematizing the figuration in the first place in a way that might be described derisively as “cartoonish.”

It is interesting to compare the light design on both images. Notice the way the clouds in the Eurpean painting become lighter in the center, and surround the main figure’s head with a white halo that is by far the brightest area of the picture. The head of the figure herself is actually quite dark in comparison, and the black head ornament further adds contrast to the white background in the immediate vicinity.

In contrast, the boy’s head, the main subject of interest in the Persian painting, is in fact the lightest part of the painting….or rather its mass is a largest non-ornamental white mass. The cups are actually whiter, and the hands are equally white.