« I was wondering what to do with that old thing | Main | Catherine and the dwarves »

Comments

JWebb

It's hard to see, but I think it's a "double portrait" with the artist appearing in the background mirror. I think Escher did some of this too.

JWebb

Ooops. I clicked on the link and I was wrong. No points for me...

gail

Well, it IS a double portrait. You're right on that point. Van Eyck does it in other paintings as well.

JWebb

I guess it's not truly recursive because the mirror shows not only different people from a different view, but there is no mirror behind them to carry out further iterations?

Jake

You make these Scribal point questions too hard for idiots.. (like me..) Why cant you just ask simple things like "What is the supervillain The Penguin's real name?" or 'Who was David Lee Roth replaced by when he left the band Aerosmith?"

Come on.. We dummies want to play to..

gail

Yay JWebb! You're right. It's not truly recursive (as in the Droste effect), just suggestive of a "world within a world," which is how the critics tend to use "mise en abyme" -- placed in infinity.

gail

I'll work on it Jake.

JWebb

Yippee!! Now I've got TWO points! (The one on top of my head does count, doesn't it?)

Jake

I was going to say the recursive thing too but I didn't want to sound all artsy-fartsy and stuff.. It would ruin my working-class, underedumacated, lumpen proletariat image.

The comments to this entry are closed.