Unit 9 Context 4 Elememt 1 - Dissertation

The imagined and the real: a study of the classical phenomenon
of the architectural Capriccio in relation to space and landscape

2
CONTENTS
Introduction....................................................................................................................3

The Capriccio and its Complexities: A Background Context........................................5

1 Past and Present: Adaptations based on techniques used in Capriccio. ..................7

2 Representation of Landscape by Means of Psychogeography ...............................19

Conclusion .................................................................................................................26
List of Figures .............................................................................................................28
Bibliography ...............................................................................................................29

3
INTRODUCTION
This dissertation presents a perspective on the concepts and applications of seeing and
understanding our landscape. It involves scholarly investigation from a range of
historical sources, in particular the classical phenomenon of the painted capriccio of
the eighteenth century, focusing fundamentally on ideals, which it may, or may not
invoke. While the eighteenth century offers a particular focus and interest to me, and
will take up a considerable body of this study chronologically, I think it is also
important to include a wide historical retrospect of the idea of capriccio, because
indeed many of the artists and artworks I will refer to, are often very much the sum of
their influences.
My study will first briefly analyse the capriccio in its literal sense. Capriccio by
definition does in fact denote, “the features of imaginary and/or real architecture,
ruined or intact, in a picturesque setting” (Oxford Art Online, 2004). This definition I
would argue focuses primarily on the aesthetic of the capriccio painting; for instance
the stylistic awareness that is evident in these types of landscape paintings of the
romantic and neoclassic age, and some of the architectural features they hold. My
second branch of analysis will use the basis of this definition as a starting point to
discover less exhausted fields of study regarding capriccio. For example, a semiotic
approach of looking at this phenomenon, which has been unseen in other studies
regarding the subject. My method of discussion will then go on to highlight ways in
which contemporary artists and intellectuals are observing a modern interpretation of
the capriccio. I will analyse how their work reinvents ideals of capriccio painting, by
“resembling the real world without simply repeating it” (The National Gallery, 2010).
By this I suggest that landscape cannot just be interpreted as a visceral experience of

4
natural form, but one of complex social and cultural discourse, which I will explore.
My research will also deal with the concepts, questions, methods, and applications of
landscape, with a particular emphasis on the ‘psychogeographical’ approach of
finding narrative and meaning in our environments. Doing this will subsequently
allow me to interpret the concept of the capriccio in a slightly different sense to its
original meaning and purpose, in terms of the renderings of architectural form. In this
way I will attempt to analyse certain works of art as reflections of certain ideologies,
as a catalyst to decipher their latent historical and cultural narratives. I am hoping that
my analysis of these historic, cultural, and theoretical sources will also enable me to
explore how certain metaphors and images, that subsequently shape our
understanding of landscape, can help to nurture new ideas of thought through modern
day art processes (present and future). Cosgrove points to a number of phenomena to
explain some distinctions when understanding landscape. In this dissertation I will
primarily focus on Cosgrove’s impression when describing ‘the idea of landscape’, in
conjunction with my focus on the ideological functions of the capriccio. My research
will draw upon the notion Cosgrove (1984, p. 18) has regarding the “specific
geographical consideration of the affective qualities of landscape” and how this is
“concentrated on the individual”. Furthermore this consideration can be applied when
relating capriccio aesthetics and a geographical imagination to enable additional
inspiration of space as a concept. Additionally, in much the same way as capricci
painters constructed their paintings as an interpretation of landscape, elements of
overly ostentatious conditions existed in it. From this context, I am hoping to realise
and bring to light the possibility in which the phenomenon of capriccio can establish
new grounds for speculation around more vexed questions based on objects and space
in a contemporary sense, touching on materiality and artificiality.

5
The Capriccio and its Complexities:
A Background Context.
In chapter one, my analysis draws upon the specific challenges of seeing and
understanding landscape, and how this is addressed and developed in a broader
discussion around the phenomenon of the capriccio. Steil’s book ‘The Architectural
Capriccio, Memory, Fantasy and Invention’, appropriates itself as an initial focus of
interest. The book and its associates broadly examine subtopics on the capriccio, and
the elements in history where they can be drawn. In support of this Dillon and Donald
(Chapter I) examine the possibilities of recreating narrative and meaning in relation to
landscapes and places. Their focus emphasises theoretical considerations needed for
further understanding of landscape, in combining past events with modern day issues.
Their study attempts to document places based on rules of interpretation. Both of
these sources act as an overall core of my research. They take into consideration hard
facts and conceptual theory, which provide a substantial amount of ground for subtext
and query to be unearthed. The second part of this chapter discusses the more refined
implications presented when interpreting old ideas of a capriccio, in order to form a
more contemporary assessment of this phenomenon. In the context on contemporary
art, the artist Sarah Pickering becomes my main subject of discussion. Her work
allows room for possible intrigue into what can constitute as having qualities to that
of a capriccio, and discovers what modes and techniques can be ensured for an
additional understanding of spaces and places.

6
In chapter two, my initial interest and assessment of capriccio landscape as an artifice
thickens. In his book ‘Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape’ Cosgrove (1984)
focuses his argument more concretely around the idea of landscape as a means of
representation through ‘an ideological concept’:
It represents a way in which certain classes of people have signified themselves and
their world through their imagined relationship with nature, and through which they
have underlined and communicated their own social role and that of others with
respect to external nature. (Cosgrove, 1984, p. 15)
There are several specific chapters of the book, that draw my interest. In the first
chapter of the book, Cosgrove bases his argument around the dual ambiguity of
landscape, firstly, he reviews not only the idea of landscape portrayal in art since the
renaissance, but secondly and more importantly he provides a geographical enquiry
which are otherwise lost in other works around this subject. It transcends many
different avenues, in which landscape can be visualised, the most appropriate being
one of geographical discussion. My interest lies in the latter of these two fields. My
focus hones in on that of a cross-disciplinary look based on Debords term
‘Psychogeography’, which Coverely (2006, p. 10) roughly interprets as “The point at
which psychology and geography collide, a means of exploring the behavioural
impact of an urban place”. Although vague, this definition offers enough scope for me
to analyse these works in conjunction, to explore my own explanations on this
subject. Furthermore, my study identifies the broader symbolic meanings of these
texts, piecing together elements where a better judgment of Capriccio can be made.

7
1
Past and Present:
Adaptations based on techniques used in Capriccio.
In the book ‘Imagining the Modern City’, Donald (1999, p.27) argues “ways of seeing
and understanding the city inevitably inform ways of acting on the space of the city”.
His distinctions between ‘reality and the imagination’ become something of an
intriguing basis upon introducing the historic background behind this study. To
demonstrate this process, Mayernik (2014, p. 12) suggests that classical capricci
painting was perhaps a critique and means of creating a “fictive reality embodying all
the credibility of documentation”, or perhaps a documentation of a current moment in
time the artist is living. But upon further study of these works we find that most of
these capricci are not merely a projection of a landscape setting, but also an
interesting set of modern perspectives on the world. Clearly Donald is not referring to
classical capricci painters or paintings in a direct sense, but the impression in which
he suggests that seeing the city in such a way is a manifestation of what kind of art
work is to be produced. This is where the connection is drawn. We see that
throughout history that visualisation and representation has been the primary
motivation on documenting the landscape, which leads to a further understanding of
it. The capriccio historically was not initially intended to invoke such heavy
consideration of thought, and has often been cast aside as second-rate picturesque
painting. Many suggest its primary function was simply to inform the viewer by
means of contrast, or as Mayernik describes it, “juxtaposing familiar things in
unfamiliar ways (local landmarks set in different landscapes)”. This is nothing to say
that the complexity of such imagery has not to be much admired, but as it happens it

8
is not to be the main forefront of my argument as this investigation progresses.
Perhaps landscape painting and in particular the paintings of capriccio, can play a
double role in respect to cultural and social philosophies. To understand this my
research must take into consideration past and present, in order to make sense of the
capriccio. Dillon (2011, p.12) suggests that the “ruin becomes an essential aesthetic
concept and recurrent image” in modern art philosophies, and why they can set the
scene in many art history paintings, particularly that of the capriccio. Dillon goes on
to describe the intent to why ruins are important in regards to relating past and
present. He terms classical ruins as “material reminders of a dead past but pointing
also to the inevitable desuetude of present architectural (and more broadly cultural or
political) scenes” Dillon (2011). It is the contradiction between the aesthetic qualities
of capriccio painting and the semiotic analysis that is my chief concern. This I think is
a stepping-stone in which a contemporary context of the Capriccio can be drawn,
which I will elaborate upon later.
So I ask, what ultimately makes the capriccio so visually intriguing? I have gathered
so far that ruins can constitute in providing a visual timeline of events, as to guide the
viewer through an architectural journey. Essentially representing a critique and means
on looking at hints of nostalgia from the past. But what else is recurrent in capricci
ruins that make for compelling discussion? To elaborate and examine further I think it
is important to bring to question artworks that illustrate and embody the necessity of
ruins. To do this we must analyse the bones of such work. Giovanni Battista Piranesi's
series of etchings and Architectural drawings (1756) ‘Antichita Romane’, in particular
(fig.1) ‘An Analysis of the Structure of the Mausoleum of Cecilia Metella’ is not
often thought of in terms of a prime example of eighteenth-century Capriccio art - for
good reason. Piranesi himself was most notable for his surveys and views of Rome.

9
While his predecessors indulged in the realm of greeting-card elegance landscape
depictions, Piranesi’s structural drawings in my opinion embodied all the attributes
accustomed to being highly contemporary of his time, yet his architectural oeuvre was
largely denied the credibility of holding any kind of artistic merit. In addition
(Stoppani et al., 2009) suggests when describing Piranesi’s ‘Vedute’ or Views Of
Rome as the “prophetic anticipation of the contemporary metropolitan condition, a
sure influence on modern culture and perhaps of his own predecessors”. However, her
argument does not take account of what can be seen in (fig.1). The distinctive parallel
between architectural proposals and intricate etching technique is evident. What is
clear is that Piranesi summarised the characteristics of these three disciplines:
archaeology, architecture and history by giving a snapshot view of the drawings in the
series, it compromises with my argument that the ‘Antichita’ series rather than the
‘Vedute’ holds the distinctive sense of being radically new for its time. Furthermore
the etching in question takes into consideration Ruins (past), Nature (present), and
architecture (future) elements, which combine all the qualities of a highly
sophisticated capricci depiction. Furthermore Jacobs, S. (2009) interprets the
“associations with tradition of the picturesque in three ways: first, by focusing on an
environment in which the natural and artificial (through the urban and rural) merge;
second, by acknowledging the amorphous and nondescript character such as
environment and doing full justice to its whimsical elements; and third, by referring
implicitly but often also explicitly to earlier landscape depictions and visualisations”.
All of these recognisably artistic devices do not take away from the fact that Piranesi
himself was accustomed to working as an architect, simply “exploiting the capriccio
as an experimental means of arriving at new concepts in architectural design” (Oxford
Art Online, 2004).

10
These designs are not just pictorial effigies of landscapes, but also designs that play
the distinct role in building structural necessity. In short they serve a purpose, not
only to inform by means of representation, but through their ability to transcend
traditional thinking. It seems important for the need to invent and adapt the templates
that were there before, to understand that the current evolving environment also
depends on the landscape that’s vanishing, or has vanished.
Figure 1. An Analysis of the Structure of the Mausoleum of Cecilia Metella: Antichita Romane (1756) (The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York).

11
The possible opportunities we have unearthed where capriccio could have or can
acquire relevance in a contemporary understanding are by no means exhaustive. This
research has so far primarily focused on the aesthetic makeup of the capriccio, for
example: the scope and significance of the ruin, or the idea of ruination in regarding
capriccio with landscape. But where can contemporary art ideas hold significance
when associating past and present qualities of the ruin? In Macaulay’s (1953, p. 27)
extract ‘A Note on New Ruins’ she densely describes the state of ruins in the present-
day as being “for a time stark and bare, vegetationless and creatureless; blackened and
torn, they smell of fire and mortality”. The text continues with a meticulous account
pronouncing the death of the modern day landscape. The text as a whole is a real
visual escapade on describing ruins. The problem, I suppose, is how to represent this
passage (from historical to modern) without succumbing to the inevitability of
appearing too melancholic or nostalgic and without overlooking key influences.
Progressive narrative is still to be excavated when associating social factors with
ruins. Human intervention plays a distinct role when picturing landscape, after all the
ruin is a product of human intervention and achievement, as well as natural and
environmental. To exemplify this process, Sarah Pickering’s work ‘Public order,’
(2002-2005) investigates this divide between the two. As its name suggests,
Pickering’s series of photographs demonstrate the process in which human conduct is
maintained through the rules of order. Staged landscapes, streets and building facades
are condemned for the purpose of training by British riot police. Irvine, K (2010, pp.
6-9) suggests that Pickering’s photographs represent a “type of reality - that of
simulation”. This could imply or be interpreted in one sense as structures themselves
being in every state of the word, ruinous; they fictively embody architecture (ruined),
or are in the process of being ruined. Contrary to my opinion, Irvine’s quote on

12
Pickering’s work is suggestively more inclined in perceiving “a location designed to
mentally indoctrinate the men and woman in training” Irvine, K (2010). Although,
factually true it does not take into consideration our motivation upon narrating these
environments as simple structures whereby elements of capriccio can be found. As we
examine Pickering’s work we see that much the same as what was discovered earlier,
the capriccio follows the same chronological rule of ruination, at looking at what has
been, and what remains. The juxtaposition of real and imagined elements and
narratives in, (Pickering’s, 2005) (fig. 2) ‘Front Garden, School Road’ similarly
Figure 2. Front Garden, School Road (2005), [Digital print]

13
follows the same trend as that of a traditional capriccio. We see the distinct parallels
in which Jacobs described earlier as the three common elements in which visual
cohesion in capriccio is best understood. Although true, these elements in Pickering’s
work do not denote the same sense of being natural like an eighteenth century
capriccio painting, for they are distinctively un-naturally dramatic, all adapted to stage
maximum visual narration. Many of the ideas alluded to above are suggestive of
Piranesi’s playful articulation on shifting the factors between nature and civilisation,
which ultimately exposes decisive historical and cultural narratives - for example the
significance of the ruin. What is deceptive though, is it while architectural, natural,
and historic insistence is constant throughout studying these works, psychological
aspects are simply echoed in both Pickering’s and Piranesi’s work, particularly in the
works I’ve mentioned. Rarely does the viewer come in to contact with a human
presence as such, the observer virtually always depends upon the landscape to convey
the story. In the Chapter ‘Landscape as Theatre’, Jackson (1979, p. 68) also states the
landscapes importance in some examples of high renaissance painting as “serving to
locate or define the human action”. These hints alone suggest a sophisticated
relationship in which geographical knowledge is inserted within a wider sphere of
social and cultural production through overlapping metaphors, reminiscent of early
capriccio ideas, and still, I would argue, palpable in modern landscape
representations. Pickering’s work is implicit for the need to “explore an ideal - a state
of normality, whatever that is, but her photos reveal a curious probing into what
constitutes the aesthetics of constructed environments” (The British Journal of
Photography, et al., 2010). The metaphors suggestive of spectacles and theatrically
staged environments are fraught when analysing Pickering’s work, hence its
importance when addressing the implications of deconstructing such artworks.

14
Upon further examination of Pickering’s series ‘Public Order’, ‘Semi–Detached,
2004’, our view is diverted; the apparent structural authenticity and natural elements
of the environment in ‘Front Garden, School Road’ becomes irrelevant. In (fig, 3) our
attention is first drawn to the “cartoon-like” qualities, and it’s apparent “reductive
organizational structure and general cleanliness”, as Irvine, K (2010, pp. 6-9)
suggests. I think it is paramount when visualising such works to take account of their
obvious imitation. In essence it is the imitation of the works I have likened to the
capriccio that makes them so visually exciting. In her review of Pickering’s work,
(Rudick et al., 2008) liken the imitation of the sets in the photographs to that of
‘staged dramas’. With this in mind it seems more appropriate to liken such
environments to ‘theatre’ or, even better still, to say the act of theatrical disposition or
‘staged sets’ appears true throughout when envisioning the capriccio as a whole for
that instance. Compositionally ‘Semi-Detached’ becomes most intriguing. Emphasis
on the architectural structure and threshold are prominent, so as to welcome the
viewer into a different train of thought, the eye is drawn to the open door on the right,
seemingly accessible to enhance the viewers intrigue into the space. Only misjudged
to find that the space is not that of a normal structure, but a single horizontal plane
façade, undoubtedly a prop. Hints of ruination are suggested although it is not of
primary importance. The architectural setting resembles that of my next artwork of
study.

15
Figure 3. Semi-Detached (2004), [Digital print]

16
In the work of (Messina, 1475) ‘St Jerome In His Study’ (fig. 4) we can connect the
same set of composition techniques likened to that of Pickering’s photographs and,
although dissimilar the painting holds similar traits to traditional capricci. In
"Building the Picture: Architecture in Italian Renaissance Painting", an art exhibition
at the National Gallery in London (2014), the judgments of traditional architectural
Figure 4. St Jerome in His Study (1475), [Oil On Lime]. The National Gallery, London.

17
space in paintings is subsequently subverted when introduced to a new understanding
on viewing renaissance painting. In her review of the exhibition (Clarke et al., 2014)
note the power in these architecturally sound pieces, and their ability to “engage the
viewer and together weave a series of intriguing narratives.” As well as the curation
team, experts in the field of Italian Renaissance painting and contemporary artists
correlate foremost characteristics of these works to propel a new way of seeing and
understanding old environments, with new perspectives. My focus teams with a
section of the exhibition: ‘Entering the Picture’ when comparing the composition of
‘St Jerome In His Study’ with Pickering’s work, with a broader importance to the role
of the phenomenon of the capriccio. Rhodes, speaking on behalf of (The National
Gallery, 2014) explains the “possibility of moving into the world of this picture”
when analysing Messina’s ‘St Jerome’. His analysis first investigates the various uses
of iconography and its implications when reading the painting. He then goes on to
describe the poignancy of “the landscape in the very background that’s framed for us
by the windows that are on the left and the right-hand side of the image”. It is this
observation that becomes my main motivation when questioning Pickering’s ‘Semi-
detached’ and its determination to indulge one’s inquiry. The event, as I intend to
deem it, is authenticated metaphorically rather than through factual detail and
observation, though indeed it is questionable to suggest that the iconography may
hold larger importance when discussing capriccio. Undeniably, our understanding of
ruination may hint at iconographic symbolism being of upmost importance when
seeing different elements of capriccio, which does not suggest that it should be
completely ignored. But for this instance, I centre my reading around the
representation of space. The painting of ‘St Jerome In His Study’ works
uncompromisingly on so many different levels, which is why it is hard to pin down a

18
singular valid recess. Although, going back to my earlier questioning around
‘theatrical’ enquiry in capriccio, it seems a compromisingly decent way of addressing
this painting. In her journal on understanding ‘An Iconographic Analysis’ of
Messina’s St Jerome, (Jolly et al., 1983) peruses mainly objects in the painting, but
also hints at the presence of “his desk on a raised platform which forms the floor of
his study”. The platform itself, or as jolly identifies the “carrel is set within a much
larger stone-vaulted building”, a style reminiscent to that of a theatrical set. Mayernik
(2009, pp. 21-29) consolidates this theme when discussing components of early
capricci, he states: “The principles of landscape composition depended on the tried-
and-true structure of foreground as frame: often with the requisite repoussoir tree
trunk or temple ruin leading the viewer's gaze into the picture”. In this case, the
surrounding architectural edifice acts as the catalyst. Upon further investigation the
‘door’ to the left of the paintings foreground seems odd. We note its difference to the
surrounding brick portico, which does not hold any kind of distinct resemblance to the
platform that Jerome sits, but looks more like a botched MDF prop. However, the
painting still warrants our query of the space similar to that of Pickering’s ‘semi-
detached’. Jackson (1979, p. 67) suggests it is the metaphor of the theatre that
“implies people’s ability to see themselves as occupying the centre of the stage”.
The viewer’s intrigue is notably influenced by such structures, which indicates the
skill between linking landscape and the technique of composition and perspective to
enhance our query. Not only does this document the physical structure of the place,
but also enhances the aspects that reveal its artifice and purpose as a location and how
it can be interpreted. It is reasonable, to question this linkage between the capriccio by
means of aesthetic representation and the underlying longing to try and discover
hidden narratives through the means of Psychogeography.

19
2
Representation of Landscape by Means of Psychogeography
From the research I have obtained in Chapter 1 we have been able to question the vast
amount of pictorial ephemera utilized when creating and understanding a capriccio.
The employment of this information made possible the historical points in time when
narrating new evaluations of landscapes, which has been represented in the work of
artists since the time of the renaissance to present-day. We have also discovered the
capriccio’s ability to intrigue one’s questioning around the idea of subordinate space
in the form of ‘staged’ artworks, in conjunction with landscapes, and why this
assessment of real and imagined space is of any significance. Beyond this, it opens up
additional strategies to consider after combining connections between all these
factors, which brings to fruition the purpose of Psychogeography in my study.
To substantiate my claim that the phenomenon of the capriccio and Psychogeography
bear any kind of resemblance I think it imperative to give reason for my associations.
Certainly I am not suggesting that factually a link has ever existed between the two
seemingly opposing disciplines. Although links can be found it is important that we
note the uncommon relationship between the two. My discussion in this chapter bases
the argument of discussion around the ability to indulge ones imagination. Indeed, in
his article Mayernick (2009) suggests that “The capriccio, in essence, depended on
drama and hyperbole to create a sense of both believability and sublime
impossibility”. In combination Cosgrove (1984, p.17) notes when explaining ‘the idea
of landscape’ that it is “composed for its aesthetic content and may excite a

20
psychological response”, he goes on to suggest that landscapes can engage a
“subjective response in those who observed or experienced them” Cosgrove (1984). I
would argue that both of these factors intertwine unavoidably. To regard capriccio as
a singular technical process of artistic production seems unthrifty, as does
disregarding suggestion that landscape should just be interpreted as a visceral
experience of natural form. On the contrary, both connote deep psychological and
geographical meanings, just to their own cause, and accordingly together. On the
contrary, some aspects that make up the capriccio require more in depth analysis.
Mayernik (2009) describes the themes of “changing scale (making something humble
into something grand, or vice versa)” while interpreted conversely; making landscape
humble and enriching our thoughts on otherwise neglected spaces. The semiotic
principle of the capriccio as an impression of understanding the landscape as a
construct becomes my main focus upon introducing this chapter.
I must also contrast my approach here to that of Burckhardt (2015, pp.31-32) whose
book Why is Landscape Beautiful?: The Science of Strollology, highlights the “range
of phenomena found in our environment—colours, structures, identifiable natural
contexts and signs of human intervention”. These approaches of seeing landscape
resonate continuously throughout my own dissertation. Burckhardt (2015)
additionally, describes these analogues with constant reassurance to this experience of
a “charming place”, he continues:
“To identify a landscape as charming is insofar synonymous with the endeavour to
‘filter out’ whatever we actually do see in the place visited, so as to be able to
integrate the outcome in our preconceived, idealized image of the charming place”

21
What Burckhardt describes here, is a person’s ability to make best of picturing a
landscape in plain sight, and then being able to romanticise such visions and how they
should be perceived. This quintessential manner of observation could depend on a
psychogeographical approach, which might offer itself as a means of studying
landscape best. It could also be possible to suggest the capriccio’s artifice can
substitute a setting of disregarded integrity; the pomp and foppish style may act as a
method of making best judgment out of a bad space, although our understanding of
ruins in capriccio may contradict this way of seeing. I think it’s feasible to suggest
that there are many different avenues and approaches where associations can be
found, which I am going to try and discover.
In ‘The Situationist City’ by Simon Sadler, he coincidentally assimilates the study of
Piranesi’s ‘Carceri’ with Psychogeography. The manner in which he links the two
tends to favour that of post-modern architectural discussion, as a means of creating an
ideal purpose, or as the chapter title states a “Formulary For a New Urbanism” Sadler
(1998, p. 69). I’d like to point out at this point of the discussion that, my intention
does not follow the same path; my objective is to produce an interesting set of
perspectives and connections, as a means of looking at things differently, not by
means of proposal. Although some, good points are made. Sadler (1998, p. 76)
explains, “Eighteenth-century theorists had advocated the picturesque and sublime as
stimulants to reverie”, in hindsight reverie as an act of psychogeographical
temperament tends to be in high regard throughout history. Aimlessly drifting wide-
eyed, taking note of defunct babble on the street seemed a popular pastime. Why, for
that matter should this way of seeing be endorsed today? I’d suggest that for all its
deep musing, psychogeography postulates an aura of comical value, which should not
be overlooked as mere capricious sentimentality. To expand further, the mode of

22
seeing through the eyes of an eighteenth century visionary as Sadler suggests derives
from a desire to create a way of seeing which opposes conventional cognition of the
environment. The act of translating such cognition of landscape in an art form
assimilates the themes particular to that in capriccio. To locate my claim that a
comedic assessment of our landscape is necessary depends on all the principles of an
‘eighteenth-century’ flâneur to substitute my argument, or as Coverely (2006, p. 13)
puts it “psychogeography and its practitioners provide a history of ironic humour that
is often a welcome counterbalance to the portentousness of some of its more jargon-
heavy proclamations”. The experiences of space through reason, perception,
imagination, and memory (subconsciously or consciously) to idealise the views of our
environment, I think is an intrinsic part of a creative ability of which everyone shares,
imagination of this sort is not confined by a mode of hierarchy but through ones own
curiosity. Furthermore in the views proposed by Burckhardt et al. (2011, p. 149) he
suggests “If it is indeed the case that each person viewing a landscape picks out
certain elements and filters out others in order to paint his own picture of a pleasant
place, the selection is doubtless highly individual: every person applies different
criteria”. The style of capriccio as I see it, is the end product of this query, an artistic
culmination of thought, and an attempt to idealise stubborn landscapes over time in a
snapshot projection. In essence it is inspiration of the ‘commonplace’ which I am
talking about, for example: “crowds moving through space, architectural and human
configurations, signs and images, the sounds and tempi of everyday life” Donald
(1999, p. 45).

23
The transitory nature of psychogeography is represented visually in the paintings of
the traditional capriccio artist: Giovanni Paolo Panini. In both of these
characteristically capricci paintings (fig. 5) and (fig. 6) our role as ‘pedestrian’ and
‘flâneur’ enters at street level. The course in this case the path creates a space of
complete architectural and allegorical immersion through a melee of activity, to
which all lines are drawn towards the anti-climax of the exit through the arches in the
centre. In Part, what Panini demonstrates is the passage from observer to participant,
with all the encompassing qualities of geography and narrative at play. The scenario
“invites the testing of playful and experimental methods which attempt to articulate
their complexity” (DeSilvey et al., 2013). The paintings raise many questions that
challenge the distinction between what Cosgrove terms ‘Humanistic geography’ and
landscape painting (1984). According to Cosgrove (1984, p. 33) “The subject of
landscape in art is the spectator or the artist, participating as creator or controller
through the medium of perspective”. There is, of course relationship between the
artist and us the spectator, but I think more importantly Panini’s guidance lets the role
of spectator take priority, thus allowing room for an amount of imagination and
scepticism. But of course the process of taking a walk ‘mentally’ through a painting
and taking a walk ‘physically’ are a whole world apart in theory, but more applicable
as a creative process, as Debord (1958, quoted in Coverely, 2006, p. 94) states in his
glossary of psychogeographical terminology as: “Unitary Urbanism The theory of
the combined use of arts and techniques for the integral construction of a milieu in
dynamic relation with the experience in behaviour”. Psychogeography, seems from
the outset a highly speculative mode of seeing, able to “distil the varied ambiances of
the urban environment” (2006) through the most simple of actions (taking a walk).

24
Figure 5. A Capriccio of Roman Ruins with the Arch of Constantine (1755) [Oil on canvas]
Figure 6. A Capriccio of the Roman Forum (1741) [Oil on canvas]

25
From the context of psychogeography our understanding of capriccio is filled with
possibilities, what first seems an ‘ideological concept’ becomes more concrete, and
makes the transit from historical to contemporary all the more relevant. The
anachronisms we face still stand the test of time, and dictate a way of seeing which
“are not just nostalgic for enervated futures and run-down architectural dreams, but
fascinated by the tectonic overlap between modernism and the machinery of mass
destruction.” (Dillon et al., 2008). As a slightly more breezy parallel to what Dillon
suggests, an anachronistic depiction also allows possibility for more light-hearted
innuendos of the modern architectural ruin, the coliseum as a fridge magnet, sold in a
Trafalgar Square souvenir shop for example. It is questionable therefore, to ask what
are the limitations to this phenomenon of psychogeography, and when does it cease to
become anything more than it already is?

26
CONCLUSION
This dissertation is conceived as a modest contribution to our understanding of the
relation between the notion of seeing and representing landscapes. More specifically,
it attempted to trace the historical styles in landscape tradition as a method of revising
and re-establishing their original intentions. The problem throughout was always
concerned with allowing room for uncertainty and interpretation when dealing with
such nebulous concepts. The question I addressed, was why this phenomenon seemed
appropriate when attempting to understand space and landscape better. My aim in
combatting this problem was to break the predictability of seeing landscapes without
a purpose, and opposing conventional methods of observation. Heidemann and
Kersten (2011, p. 23) have stressed “the fact that such an image is based always on a
certain notion of landscape – a notion that need not necessarily correspond to reality”.
Consequently the capriccio prompted the investigation by “inventing a reality that is
at once fantastic and yet believable” Mayernik (2009). The purpose of capriccio in
this essay was not just to elaborate on its objectives, nor compositions, or
perspectives, but towards highlighting the linkage between our past, present and
future. More straightforwardly, it makes us think openly with greater foresight. One
could quite easily spend time theorising on the paradoxes and metaphors, or merely
reflect upon the aesthetics of landscape artwork, effectively re-enacting past
narratives. Additionally ones approach upon imagining the real could centre character
on that of the flâneur, as a means of representing an individual’s view of reality.
Solnit (2001, quoted in Coverely, 2006, pp. 61-62)

27
“The only problem with the flâneur is that he did not exist, except as a type, an ideal,
and a character in literature… no one quite fulfilled the idea of the flâneur, but
everyone engaged in some version of flâneury”.
From this point of view, our perception of the meaning of landscape is therefore by no
means a personal or vanguard, our application can therefore be submissive or highly
conscious of our surroundings, becoming more than just spectator but regulator.

28
Figures
Figure 1. An Analysis of the Structure of the Mausoleum of Cecilia Metella;
Antichita Romane, By Giovanni Battista Piranesi, (1756), The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, New York.
Figure 2. Front Garden, School Road, By Sarah Pickering, (2005) Available at:
http://www.sarahpickering.co.uk/Works/Pulic-Order/workpg-03.html
(Accessed: 25 November 2015).
Figure 3. Semi-Detached, By Sarah Pickering (2004) Available at:
http://www.sarahpickering.co.uk/Works/Pulic-Order/workpg-17.html
(Accessed: 25 November 2015).
Figure 4. St Jerome In His Study, By Antonello De Messina (1475), The National
Gallery, London.
Figure 5. A Capriccio of Roman Ruins with the Arch of Constantine, By Giovanni
Paolo Panini (1755), Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto.
Figure 6. A Capriccio of the Roman Forum, By Giovanni Paolo Panini (1741), Yale
University Art Gallery, New Haven.

29
Bibliography
BOOKS/ONLINE:
Burckhardt, L., Becker, I., Heidemann, C., Kersten, A., Schmitz, M. and Seyfarth, L.
(2011) Belvedere. Why is Landscape Beautiful?. Bielefeld: Kerber Verlag.
Burckhardt, L. (2015) Why Is Landscape Beautiful?: The Science of Strollology.
Edited by Markus Ritter and Martin Schmitz. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.
Cosgrove, D. (1984) ‘Social Formation And Symbolic Landscape’. 2nd edn. Madison,
Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Coverely, M. (2006) Psychogeography. Harpenden: Oldcastle Books. Pocket
Essential Series.
Dillon, B. (ed.) (2011) ‘RUINS’. London: Whitechapel Gallery.
Donald, J. (1999) ‘Imaginging the Modern City’. London: The Athlone Press.
Irvine, K. (2010) ‘Sarah Pickering’. New York: D.A.P/Distributed Art Publishers, pp.
6-9.
Jackson, J,B. (1970) ‘The Necessity for Ruins, and Other Topics’ Amherst: University
of Massachusetts Press, pp. 67-68.
Jacobs, S. (2009) 'The Photoresque: Images Between City and Countryside', (ed.)
Beyond the Picturesque. Ghent (Belgium): S.M.A.K, pp. 49–51.
The National Gallery (2010) Clive Head: ‘Modern Perspectives’. Available at:
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/channel/contemporary-artists/ (Accessed: 25
October 2015).
Macaulay, R. (1953) 'A Note on New Ruins', in Dillon, B. (ed.) RUINS. London:
Whitechapel Gallery, pp. 27-28.
Mayernik, D. (2014) 'Meaning and Purpose of the Capriccio', Steil, L. The
Architectural Capriccio: Memory, Fantasy and Invention. Farnham: Ashgate
Publishing Limited, p.12
Oxford Art Online, (2004) Capriccio. Available at:
http://www.oxfordartonline.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/subscriber/article/grove/art/T01390
1 (Accessed: 4 October 2015).
Sadler, S. (1998) The Situationist City. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MITT Press.

30
JOURNALS:
Anonymous. (2010) 'Safe from Harm', The British Journal of Photography,
157(7774), pp. 22.
Clarke, G. (2014) 'A Sense Of Perspective', Architectural Review, 236(1410), pp. 92-
93
DeSilvey, C. (2013) 'Reckoning with Ruins', Progress In Human Geography, 37(4),
pp. 465-485.
Dillon, B. (2008) 'Ravishing anachronisms', Sight & Sound, 18(1), p. 8.
Jolly, P, H. (1983) 'Antonello da Messina's Saint Jerome in His Study: An
Iconographic Analysis', The Art Bulletin, 65(2), pp. 238-253.
Mayernik, D. (2009) 'From Painting En Plein Air to INVENTING THE
CAPRICCIO', American Artist, 73(794), pp. 21-29.
Rudick, N. (2008) 'Sarah Pickering', Artforum International, 46(7), pp. 364.
Stoppani, T. (Aut 2009) 'The Vague, the Viral, the Parasitic: Piranesi's Metropolis',
Footprint, Issue 5, p147-160, 14p
VIDEO/FILM:
The National Gallery (Apr 2014) John David Rhodes, Entering the Picture, Building
the Picture. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQokpBBoXIc
(Accessed: 12 October 2015).

Unit 9 Context 4 Elememt 1 - Dissertation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Unit 9 Context 4 Elememt 1 - Dissertation

Similar to Unit 9 Context 4 Elememt 1 - Dissertation (20)

Unit 9 Context 4 Elememt 1 - Dissertation