andrea pozzo

131 Pages·2002·4.97 MB·English

ANDREA POZZO
THE JOlNlNG OF TRUTH AND ILLUSION
Jodi L. OIToole
History and Theory Program
School of Architecture
McGiI University, Montréal
December 1999
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and
Research in partial fulfillment of the requirernents of the
degree of Master of Architecture.
Q Jodi L OIToole 1999
"su isitions and Acquisitions et
Bib ographic Services serviees bibliographiques
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une Licence non
exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la
National Li'brary of Canada to Bfihottièque nationale du Canada de
reproduce, loan, distribute or selî reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou
copies of this thesis in mimform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous
paper or electronic formats. hf onne de microficheffilm, de
reproduction sur papier ou sur format
électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du
copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thése.
thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thése ni des extraits substantiels
may be printed or othenivise de ceiie-ci ne doivent être imprimés
reproduced without the anthor's ou autrement reproduits sans son
permission. autorisation.
for James
ABSTRACT
Andrea Pouo was an architect, writer and painter spanning
the Iate seventeenth and eariy eighteenth centuries. The
focus of this study is on his paintings of perspectival illusions
and his treatise on perspective entitled, Perspectiva
pictorum et architectorum published in two volumes in 1693
and 1700. This thesis seeks to understand the work of
Pouo in light of contemporary philosophical debate over
the deception of the senses and their ability to distinguish
truth from illusion. Pozzo's intentions are examined through
a study of the positions of René Descartes, Galileo Galilei
and other related artists and architects on the technical and
ethical issues surrounding the deceptive nature of
perspective illusions.
Andrea Pouo était un architecte, écrivain et peintre dont
I'oeuvre s'étend de la fin du dix-septième siècle j'usqu'au
début du dix-huitème siècle. L'intérêt de cette étude est
centré sur ses peintures d'illusions perspectives et sur son
traite sur la perspective intitulé "Perspectiva pictonim et
architectorum" publie en deux volumes en 1693 et 1700.
Cette thèse cherche a comprendre l'oeuvre de Pouo en
tenant compte du débat philosophiquec ontemporain contre
la déception des senses et leur abilité de distinguer la vérité
de l'illusion. Les intentions de Pono sont ici examinées a
travers une étude des positions de René Descartes, Galileo
Galilei et autres artistes et architectes apparentés sur les
points de vue technique et éthique entourant la nature
déceptive d'illusions perspectives.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
For his inspiring lecture given at Penn State UniversRy which
led me to follow my instincts to study in Montréal, Alberto
Pétez-Gomez desenies an unending amount of thanks. He
has been a truly great professor whose program has
fostered an atmosphere of discovery creating a community
of individuels who aspire to understand architecture through
a search for possibiIities of what coutd exist in the world.
To recognize a 'teacher.' Katsuhiko Muramoto with careful
consideration gives of himself to nudge his students toward
their own understanding of their work and its relationship to
the history of making. I, and so many others, have been
inspired by him.
A special thanks to Louise Pelletier and Greg Caicco for
offering their valuable insights into Our work throughout the
course of the program both in historical research and in
making. Also in the productive review sessions attended
by Marco Frascari, Stephen Parcell, Dan Hoffman and Indra
Kagis McEwan, my thoughts were ignited with their
energies. To Natalie Bérubé, who has been a wonderful
support throughout the writing of mis thesis and in the finai
hours also provided desperate translation se~~ceIsw ,o uld
Iike to say congratulations.
Don Kunze, I am proud to Say, provided the initial spark
and basis of education which prepared me for the journey
in Montréat. Equally as important was Dan Willis' patience
and the relentless push. The Penn State Rome
piograrn,founded through the hard work of Romolo
Martemucci, ignited a bve for the city of Rome still pursued
in this thesis. During times spent in Rome, I was also able
to witness the thorough care given to the study of a place
by James Kalsbeek.
Judith Harris Ajelto and her family have a beautiful
importance to this thesis exposing me to much of Rome
and many of the small towns in which some of Pozzo's
works are situated. The view from her window overlooked
the Collegio Romano and where the dome of the church of
St. lgnatius would have towered if it were not an illusion.
For long hours of work, she allowed me sit at that rnagical
window and dream of these words. I thank her from the
bottom of my heart.
I would like to thank the Jesuits at the Biblioteca della
Pontificia Universita Gregoriana for allowing me access to
their precious archives. AIso, I carry a necessary
appreciation of the facilities of the Iibraries of the Biblioteca
nazionale di Firenze and Kunsthistorisches Institutes in
Florence for invaluable research into Galileo's connection
to the arts and conternporary artists. The BibIiotecsi della
Pontificia Universita Gregoriana, McGill University's
Blackader-Lautermann,a nd Mclennan-RedpathL ibraries,
also McGill University's Mossman collection at the PhysicaI
Sciences and Engineering Library, the library archives of
the CCA, and Wesleyan University Library al1 provided
access to the manuscripts and texts on this subject incfuding
several different printings and translations of Pozzo's
treatise. These resources presented an intimate knowfedge
of the architectural treatises on perspective relevant to this
thesis and materials on the surrounding debates. I must
not forget to acknowledge the tuition deferment and
scholarship provided by McGili University.
My most sincere gratitude is reserved for my husband,
James, whose passion for making equals only my love for
him and Our son, Evan.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appearance
Andrea Pozzo
Light
Perception
Shadow
Illusion
Point of View
Truth and Falsehood
Machines
Frozen Moment
Appendix
Notes
Bibliography
APPEARANCE
I do not possess such a perfect faculty of discrimina-
tion. I am more like the monkey who firmly believed
.
that he saw another monkey in the mirror.. and discov-
ered his error only after running behind the glass sev-
eral times ... I should iike to know the visual differences
by which he [his adversaryl so readily distinguishes the
real from the spuri~us.~
The invention of the telescope in the beginning of the sev-
enteenth century called into question, among other things,
the presence of what is seen. In architecture, the disparity
of what is and what is seen had been understood as the
need for optical correction since the Renaissance discov-
ery of De architectura written down by Vitruvius sometime
prior to 27 B.C. As a distinction from linear perspective
called perspectiva artificialis, this primitive forrn of perspec-
tive is known as pespectiva naturaiis. Recognizing the
inherent visual distortions in the perception of form, build-
ing members had to be adjusted to appear in 'ideal' propor-
tion.
Renaissance artists reexamined the visual worid interpret-
ing, expanding and eventually disernbodying perspectiva
natmlis. During the eariy fifteenth century, there was an
influx of geometrical manuscripts from Byzantium mention-
ing the art of perspective brought to Florence by Manuel
Chrisotara and Angolo da Scatperia. These books con-
tained images of geometric shapes drawn in perspective
with central projection points and finite distance points. Latin
M-O, fnm, ~1426. translations were completed between 1410 -1 41 5. This cir-
Church of Sto. Maria No-
vela. F I ~ W ~IWC ~. cumstance rnay explain the proliferation of works in per-
spective in this particular region of Italy2 Although
early attempts at Iinear perspective were not yet
the codified perspective of the Scientific Revolu-
tion, these representations marked a moment in
the field of inquiry which was turning toward lin-
ear perspective and a changing world view pos-
tulated in a scientific representation of a space.
By 1610 , the date of publication of Galiteo's short
treatise on the moon and the satellites of Jupiter,
entitled Sidereas nuncius, the publication of nu-
merous treatises on techniques and theories of
perspective drawing resulted in a change in the
- conception of space from a heterogenous qual-
Stu*ofma~ed~in*ron ity to a systematized, mathematical space in which vision
a head pmiected in10 hori-
zontaisecoonsfromPiem was reduced to the rules of linear perspective. Galileo
della Francesca. De
Prospeciiva pingendi, c. Galiiei made use of the analytical tools of visual represen-
rnid 1400.
tation to understand the new science of what was seen
through his telescope.
A direct relationship behrveen 'seeing and knowing' as un-
derstood by Anstotelians was rejected by Galileo in favor
of demonstrable experiments based in a rational explana-
___---__ tion of what is observed in Nature. Galileo
..
presented a direct challenge to the Scho-
lastic tradiiion in his conclusions on the
nature of the moon in Sidereas nuncrus?
"In virt0 di pro~pettiva,G"~a lileo demon-
Galilea Galiiei, Sidereas
strated that the shadows on the surface
nunaus, 1610.