Leonardo

Correction: On Making Drawings while Practising Rajneesh's Dhyana YogaSource: Leonardo, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Spring, 1977), p. 176Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1573755 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 17:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLeonardo.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.113 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:36:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Letters Letters Letters Letters Letters Letters Letters Letters

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

I do not sense the paradox suggested by his situation (3). Masking power must remain constant, since the entire visual field would be subject to a continuous size-constancy modification. There could be no masking difference between the perception and the geometric projection.

My interpretation of Ronchi rests on my acceptance that the underestimation of distance is a corollary of the overestimation of size. For the overestimation of size, I have referred to the work of Thouless, which has been cited by Reggini.

While I admit to considerable extrapolation of my ideas together with artistic licence in the conception of my constructions, I feel sure that the incorporation of the curves implicit in the projected geometry of perspective would contribute to the vitality and the sense of participation in a representation.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

Whether straight or curved perspective is more appropriate in each of the four situations I listed in my previous letter, above, is a tricky question, although I simply asserted that one wants to use curved perspective. It is a question of how to apply the system as well as which system to apply. With reference to Alan Turner's reply, above, to my letter[Leonardo 10, 176 (1977)], I will enlarge only on the first two situations.

(1) In traditional perspective, a cone of vision with its apex at the viewer's eye intersects the picture plane. In a wide angle view, the apex of this cone approaches and may exceed 180?, but the picture plane cannot meaningfully intersect the cone, unless the apical angle is less than 180?. The limit of 180? is therefore not arbitrary, as Turner suggests. If traditional perspective is abandoned and a full hemisphere of vision is depicted on one plane, then its bounding great circle, any portion of which would in traditional perspective be shown straight, will be shown as a closed loop, i.e. curved or segmented.

(2) Isometric perspective, which Turner proposes, copes, badly with the general case of wide angle vision, because it eliminates the diminution of size with distance. It copes adequately with the facade of the palace but not with the landscape beyond. The

question of tolerance to change in viewpoint might be resolved

by actual examples and I suggest a comparison between the

paintings of Uccello and of Fouquet. Kenneth R. Adams

19 Dartmouth Park Rd. London NW5 ISU, England

ON TETRACONIC PERSPECTIVE

I find Kenneth R. Adams tetraconic perspective [Leonardo 9,289 (1976) ] a fascinating method, though I fear that its application in an attempt to make a drawing of the complete sphere of vision in a real situation would be a daunting process.

Accepting his claims as to the properties of the tetraconic projections, the device appears to have value for mapping solids in two dimensions and, perhaps, it is of rather more value in this respect than as a description of perspective and a vehicle for expressing ideas about forms in space. The distortions that it creates are for the most part peculiar to the geometry of the method.

I am particularly fascinated by Adams' stated property (d) and excited in anticipation of a programme that could relate the repeat tetraconic patterns to actual visual material.

Alan Turner 99 Hornsey Lane

London N6 5L W, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

DOUBLE IMAGES IN RELATION TO PAINTING

The National Museum of Wales at Cardiff recently accepted for its permanent records.the typescript of a book I have written on the later work of the Welsh artist, Evan Walters (1894-1951). The book is entitled Evan Walters and the Double Image.

Walters' extensive work on double images in relation to painting virtually introduces new visual material for painters, since double images carry spatial meaning and offer a rational approach to the problem of painting binocular and peripheral effects.

Painters in Great Britain and elsewhere interested in the subject can inspect the typescript on application to the Art Department of the National Museum of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff, South Wales, Great Britain.

Erna Meinel 53 Foxbourne Rd.

London SW17 8EN, England

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

CORRECTIONS

Readers please note the following corrections: (1) In the article The Perception of Pictorial Space in

Perspective Pictures by John L. Ward [Leonardo 9, 279 (1976)], the following corrections of errors caused by the printer's oversight should be made: p. 279, col. 1, last sentence-'my pair of hands' should read 'the pair of hands', as the phrase refers to Fig. 9 in Vasco Ronchi's article; p. 279, col. 2, line 28-Montegna should read Mantegna; p. 283, Figs. 6 and 7-the dates should come after the picture titles; p. 287, col. 2, line 33-the phrase 'at all' should be italicized and the comma should come after it; p. 288, col. 1, line 26-the phrase 'illusions in' should be deleted; p. 288, Ref. 8-'Vortage' should read 'Vortrage'.

(2) In the article Constructions Based on Curved Perspective [Leonardo 9, 275 (1976) ], the author, Alan Turner, points out that in the first column on page 276, line 14, the second mathematical expression should read a = AH (h2 + x2).

(3) In the Note by Om Upadhya, entitled On Making Drawings while Practicing Rajneesh's Dhyana Yoga, in Leonardo 9, 308 (1976), Fig. 3 has, unfortunately, been printed upside down.

(4) The name of the reviewer of the book From A to Band Back Again in Leonardo 10 (1977) p. 79 should read Lucia Beier.

ON BOOK REVIEWS

'Concerning Contemporary Art: The Power Lectures 1968-1973'

Had Bernard Myers taken the trouble to read the Lectures before writing his review [Leonardo 10, 76 (1977) ], it could not possibly have escaped even his conspicuously modest capacity for discernment to notice that the, Lectures had been re-written, some of them extensively, for publication. (The Lectures will shortly be translated into Spanish.)

I must point out that the 'star performers' were not 'flown half- way round the world for a one-night stand'. Two are resident in Australia, the others visited The Power Institute for periods of between six weeks and two months, gave several lectures other than the Power Lecture, participated in seminars and informal discussions with artists throughout the country and met academics and others seriously interested in the history, theory and criticism of contemporary art.

From this part of the world, what stands out as the most ugly feature of Myers' 'review' is the egregious, cultural imperialism implicit in its tone: the ill-disguised presumption that nothing original concerning contemporary art could possibly be said in a place like Sydney, that originality is for New York, London, Paris. 'Scholarship', Myers states pompously, 'is always better read in the privacy of one's own home under plain wrappers.' It would not have mattered in the least where he took the Lectures, had he taken the trouble to read them and made some tolerably sensible comment.

Bernard Smith, Director Power Institute of Fine Arts

University of Sydney New South Wales. 2006 Australia

176 176 176 176 176 176 176 176

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.113 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:36:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions