Closed lanscape, open minds

April 5, 2007 8:04 PM

Closed landscape? What the heck is my art instructor talking about? It doesn't help that, yes, I've got to pull one off by next week.

So we're working on landscapes. We had three projects to do over break: high horizon, low horizon and a "closed landscape". She briefly described it as somewhat horizonless, "like you'd see out a window".

Now, I don't know about her, but I've seen some really steller landscapes out the window before. The term "closed landscape" appears to be made up out of whole cloth -- what is she describing...or is all hope lost?

posted by Ogre Lawless to Media & Arts (7 answers total)

Think of it as a still life, but using objects that are situated outside.
For example, a stone and an orange on a table-top would be a classic "still life". You are indoors looking at things inside. You are sharing in the "same space".
A rock and an orange tree seen outside in a field yet viewed from inside another space (from a room, through a doorway or a car window or a birdhouse or some other structure, say) is a "closed landscape." You are not strictly sharing the space. It is framed by a barrier.
posted by Dizzy at 8:19 PM on April 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

(I asked my dad about this--- he's an artist and taught art for many years.)
posted by Dizzy at 8:20 PM on April 5, 2007

my understanding (and I could be completely wrong) is that there is less depth involved. Consider a garden view from a window, where the horizon is hidden by the shrubbery, or within a city landscape, you see buildings, but not rooftops. More Van Gogh's' Cafe Terrace at Night than his Starry Night. More Monet's Water Lilies than his Poppies. Perhaps even Manet's The Bench, the Garden at Versailles rather than his at the races. Or better still, his Boating over Monet Floating in his Studio.

All these images are available through allposters.com.
posted by b33j at 8:29 PM on April 5, 2007

One of my favorite experts at this is Magritte. Of course, his landscapes were a little... unusual... but many of his famous works involve views out of windows and balconies.
posted by Brittanie at 11:00 PM on April 5, 2007

In terms of the criterion of "horizon" and the amount of sky showing above a horizon in the first two types of landscape (high horizon and low horizon), and I am just guessin' here, I'd say it would be a landscape of entirely land (with the horizon above the picture frame), no sky at all in it.
posted by coevals at 8:06 AM on April 6, 2007

Response by poster: I think b33j and Dizzy may both be correct, though I'm still a bit muddled in terms of composition. We're limited in use of only natural objects in the landscape (which kind of sucks) which crimps the options painfully. Maybe some kind of macro shot or something...
posted by Ogre Lawless at 1:57 PM on April 6, 2007

Response by poster: I managed during this hiatus to track down some of my class comrades and the consensus is "doesn't have a visible horizon". This can be then taken to mean "high horizon in the extreme" or "landscape so becluttered as to not have a horizon".
posted by Ogre Lawless at 4:07 PM on April 9, 2007