Origins, imitation, conventions: representation in the visual arts. . - Ackerman on Paper - book review

Architectural Review, The, March, 2003 by Timothy Brittain-Catlin

By James Ackerman. London: MIT Press. 2002. [pounds sterling]30.95

This is a remarkable and peculiar book: it is written in an extremely laconic style, rather as if Professor Ackerman was now fed up with people asking his opinions and was barking out short, sharp and definitive answers. This effect is magnified by the fact that the chapters have previously been published separately for different purposes, which has resulted in some repetition, and by the book designer choosing to space both lines and paragraphs very widely. The result of all this is that the book reads like a school textbook (with some editorial oddities or inconsistencies), or possibly an A grade essay by a 16 year old star pupil.

One might therefore be distracted from the fact that Ackerman is here distilling a lifetime's observation and scholarship into some concise observations of great value. This is primarily a study about the ways in which architects capture images on paper: Ackerman presents Villard de Honnecourt's drawings in some detail; accepts Lotz's conclusion that 'the major achievement of Renaissance architects had been to establish for architects the convention of orthogonal drawing'; investigates early perspectives and scetions; and attempts a definition of da Vinci's achievements in architectural drawing. A sudden jump to the nineteenth century looks at architectural photography, comparing it to the work of the topographical perspectivists.

I regret that in referring to A. C. Pugin, Ackerman does not enter into the contemporary debate about the need for 'scientific' accuracy in reproducing mediaeval remains; for the Gothic Revival, too, was to some extent powered by a change in drawing method. But this is a Classicist's book, and a good one.