Scale

While the romantics believed that the wonder of the sublime could be in any form of nature, from the ocean to a blade of grass, scale has remained an important when considering the sublime. Burke described the causal structure of sublime objects as vastness, infinity and magnificence, and Schopenhauer’s (much mentioned in this document) example of the universe as the most sublime of objects, suggests that larger forms evoke the sublime more easily. The abstract expressionists painted large canvasses to envelop the viewer in the same way. Diane Thater’s work uses architecture as it already surrounds the viewer, and so by manipulating the surfaces, they become part of the artwork. The need for a sizeable installation becomes evident, as to involve, envelop and impress the viewer, they much be part of the installation. If I project a 16:9 rectangle on the wall, it will appear no different from a large television screen.
To fill a wall with a projection is to make it dominate the room through its impressiveness, leaving a great impression through its expanse. With this scale in mind, it is also possible to manipulate the piece to give it a false sense of proportion, so the top of the piece, at well over head height, can be scaled to look down over the viewer, or appear smaller, and even higher than the placement of the element itself.
I observed this technique being executed perfectly in a series of paintings by Sir Peter Paul Rubens, in the Royal Museum of Fine Art, in Brussels. The museum has a large gallery dedicated to his work, painted crimson, standing at twice the height of the rest of the rooms. Immediately on entering, it is evident how huge the paintings are, with each wall hosting two smaller paintings (still huge at around five metres tall) standing either side of an enormous piece which reaches to the ceiling. To take the piece in, you must stand so far back you are underneath the other huge painting on the opposite wall. When observing from a reasonable distance however, you notice the content of the paintings themselves, working from ground level up for instance the side of a mountain or ravine, with the figures corresponding to the height of the their placement, looking down, over you, as opposed to one fixed view point, where everything responds to the eye line of the viewer. Combined with the size of the piece, the effect is immensely powerful. The technique can be used to assign power to an individual as well as a landscape. Sir Anthony Van Dyck was the court painter for King Charles, a short, weak man, who did not have the statuesque presence of Henry VIII and other past rulers. To counter this, he was placed on a horse, elevating his position and giving him a sense of empowerment. Van Dyck knew that this particular painting would be hung in Saint James Palace, high up at the end of the gallery, and so exaggerated the format, painting as if he was looking up at Charles from directly below, rather than on level terms with him.