"explaining form by superimposed colour, as in architectural mouldings"
English translation: Ruskin held that form was disguised, not revealed, by the use of colour
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:
"explaining form by superimposed colour, as in architectural mouldings"
English translation:
Ruskin held that form was disguised, not revealed, by the use of colour
Explanation: As your reference is, unfortunately, in Greek, I cannot refer to the actual quotation. However, I suspect that Ruskin was writing about drawing and painting, not architecture and that he was using the example of architectural mouldings being picked out in a contrasting colour to that of the walls or ceilings as a waspish criticism. In other words, if you use colour in your work to try to show form, you should give up fine art and become a housepainter instead.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2 hrs (2011-08-24 19:20:46 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
I equally suspect that Ruskin was not writing specifically about drawings/paintings of buildings, but about drawing and painting in general. The Impressionists later used light and colour in a way that dissolved form.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 16 hrs (2011-08-25 08:29:01 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the reference, I had forgotten how good Ruskin was and must get a paper copy! The reason Ruskin used the example of architectural mouldings was simply that, given the Victorian fashion for applying them to their walls and ceilings and picking them out using colour, it was a very familiar image. The mouldings broke the flatness of the surfaces they were applied to and picking them out in colour was meant to both draw attention to them (it showed you had the money to buy them and some were much more expensive and exclusive than others) and to emphasise their effect. He also uses apples and cheeks as images to make the same point.
By superimposed colour, I don't think he means layering washes of colour, but superimposing local colour on the object. I take back what I wrote above about Ruskin dismissing atmospheric perspective, as he convincingly defends it here. However, I still think he is quite wrong about hue and advancing and recessive colour, though to a large extent he is arguing in opposition to the mechanical understanding of that effect. The apparent distance effect of a colour does depend on how it relates to other colours around it. Some years ago, I painted the ceiling of a small, high-ceilinged room in a dusty mid-tone pink to lower it and make the room seem larger. I believe it worked very well and other people agreed. Had I painted the walls red, it would not have worked, but painting them pale grey allowed the pink to have the effect of advancing the surface it was painted on.
I've looked up a few references on rendering architectural mouldings for you. It is virtually impossible to be certain of Ruskin's motives for using architectural mouldings as an example; however artists made many renderings of architectural mouldings during the period that Ruskin was writing about art. Some used no color at all, only line; others used monotone washes. Still others used complementary colors to make certain details recede visually or to recreate the illusion of depth or protrusion. Ruskin was against the use of color to accentuate form. He attacked painters who moved toward Impressionism. Some links: http://www.ehow.com/info_8018646_architectural-detail-prints...http://collections.vam.ac.uk/search/?offset=30&limit=15&narr... (If this last link fails, you can enter the Victoria and Albert website and search for "architectural mouldings drawings" choosing "images only" to pull up a wide range of illustrations.)
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
14 mins confidence:
Showing the shape of a building in your drawing by using colour to define areas
Explanation: The author is saying that there is a tendency to use colour in a picture to bring out details in the architecture, but that this should be done by some subtler means.
Liz Broomfield United Kingdom Specializes in field Native speaker of: English
attempting to express/portray depth in moldings by using different colors
Explanation: I found more of the same piece on line and I think the following section makes more clear what Ruskin is saying:
It is a favourite dogma among modern writers on colour that "warm colours" (reds and yellows) "approach" or express nearness, and "cold colours" (blue and grey) "retire" or express distance. So far is this from being the case, that no expression of distance in the world is so great as that of the gold and orange in twilight sky. Colours, as such, are ABSOLUTELY inexpressive respecting distance. http://www.readbookonline.net/read/19622/56180/
He is countering what he says is a theory of colors and the perception of depth or distance. He is saying that this theory is stupid and that it does not cohere with human perceptions of depth or distance.
Stephanie Ezrol United States Local time: 15:50 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 27
Ruskin held that form was disguised, not revealed, by the use of colour
Explanation: As your reference is, unfortunately, in Greek, I cannot refer to the actual quotation. However, I suspect that Ruskin was writing about drawing and painting, not architecture and that he was using the example of architectural mouldings being picked out in a contrasting colour to that of the walls or ceilings as a waspish criticism. In other words, if you use colour in your work to try to show form, you should give up fine art and become a housepainter instead.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2 hrs (2011-08-24 19:20:46 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
I equally suspect that Ruskin was not writing specifically about drawings/paintings of buildings, but about drawing and painting in general. The Impressionists later used light and colour in a way that dissolved form.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 16 hrs (2011-08-25 08:29:01 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the reference, I had forgotten how good Ruskin was and must get a paper copy! The reason Ruskin used the example of architectural mouldings was simply that, given the Victorian fashion for applying them to their walls and ceilings and picking them out using colour, it was a very familiar image. The mouldings broke the flatness of the surfaces they were applied to and picking them out in colour was meant to both draw attention to them (it showed you had the money to buy them and some were much more expensive and exclusive than others) and to emphasise their effect. He also uses apples and cheeks as images to make the same point.
By superimposed colour, I don't think he means layering washes of colour, but superimposing local colour on the object. I take back what I wrote above about Ruskin dismissing atmospheric perspective, as he convincingly defends it here. However, I still think he is quite wrong about hue and advancing and recessive colour, though to a large extent he is arguing in opposition to the mechanical understanding of that effect. The apparent distance effect of a colour does depend on how it relates to other colours around it. Some years ago, I painted the ceiling of a small, high-ceilinged room in a dusty mid-tone pink to lower it and make the room seem larger. I believe it worked very well and other people agreed. Had I painted the walls red, it would not have worked, but painting them pale grey allowed the pink to have the effect of advancing the surface it was painted on.
B D Finch France Local time: 21:50 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 4
Notes to answerer
Asker: Here's another link to the actual quotation (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30325/30325-h/30325-h.htm#Footnote_51) (par. 183, endnote no. 51.) So yes, basically what Ruskin was saying is that local colour cannot really express form. But I'm not sure I understand why he used "architectural mouldings" as an example. What do architectural mouldings have to do with the expression of form and why this particular example. Thank you.
Asker: Thank you. It makes sense now. And I agree with you that he is wrong about advancing and recessive colour. Warm colours generally tend to "strike the eye" more quickly than cool ones. :-)
Asker: I've been trying to select this answer as most helpful, but the links don't work. Page loads with error in every browser I've used. It's a site problem, which I hope ProZ.com staff will be able to solve some time soon.
superimposed (layers of) color cannot replicate form (architectural mouldings being an example)
Explanation: Ruskin believes that color cannot replicate the form of an object. He is criticizing the layering colors to indicate depth or projection as a "crutch." In this text, he goes on to explain that: "An apple is prettier, because it is striped, but it does not look a bit rounder; and a cheek is prettier because it is flushed, but you would see the form of the cheek bone better if it were not. Colour may, indeed, detach one shape from another, as in grounding a bas-relief, but it always diminishes the appearance of projection . . ." He wants to emphasize that color is an adornment and not a means of rendering the structure and dimensionality of an object. When he says "The blue ground will not retire the hundredth part of an inch more than the red one," he is disputing the practice of using a complementary color to give the effect of depth -- the illusion that an object, or a part of an object, is closer or farther away in a composition. He was generally in favor of reducing the number of colors in an artist's palette.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 23 hrs (2011-08-25 15:27:51 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the note! This was my second thought, but I didn't want to stay too far away from the pictorial so I didn't mention it. However, Ruskin is talking about representation, not house painting, so I would think hard before trusting that interpretation 100%. I went back and forth over the two possibilities.
Jenni Lukac Local time: 21:50 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 12
Notes to answerer
Asker: Thank you for your explanation. I'm not sure why he is using architectural mouldings as an example.
Asker: Thank you Jenni for your help and the links you came up with. Having thought long and hard on this, I tend to conclud that Victorians used colour on architectural mouldings (superimposing it) in ways that would express form, by making certain elements stand out. This picture is an example of this kind of architecture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GovernmentHouseMelbourne4_gobeirne.jpg. Thanks again for your help.
The translation workplace 
