Perspectivism, Northern, and Baroque Art

In "Scopic Regimes of Modernity", Martin Jay describes in great detail three different art forms, that of Perspectivism, Northern art, and Baroque art.

The idea of perspective allowed for the creation of much more realistic art, albeit constructed in the viewpoint of a single eye. Art in this style became increasingly confined to the geometric rules of perspective, and thus "meant the withdrawal of the painter's emotional entanglement with the objects depicted in geometricalized space" (8). In other words, perspectivism allowed for a way to represent the world in a highly realistic manner, but at the cost of making it less art and more mathematical precision.

Northern art is not much better in that particular respect. It "emphases instead the prior existence of a world of objects depicted on the flat canvas, a world indifferent to the beholder's position in front of it" (12). This is art that ignores the viewer completely, instead focusing on rendering a particular scene as precisely as possible. It is, in some ways, even less "human" than perspectivism, focusing on tiny details instead of a subject.

Baroque art seems to take a separate approach altogether. From what I gather from in the article--not being sure quite what it looks like in actuality--the Baroque art is not focused on depicting images precisely. It is described as having a "fascination for opacity, unreadability, and the indecipherability of the reality it depicts" (17). It does not seek to describe everything, it rather shows things as they are and lets the viewer interpret it as it sees fit.

With these possibly uneducated ideas of these types of art, I have to say that the Baroque art form seems to be the most appealing. The closer art gets to being reality, the less it is art. Art should be an expression. What it expresses doesn't matter much, as long as it expresses something. While realistic, detailed artwork with perspective may look impressive, it is just a picture. Not art.