Main content
AP®︎/College Art History
Course: AP®︎/College Art History > Unit 1
Lesson 4: Principles of compositionMovement
by Dr. Asa Mittman
Movement refers to a sense of motion as the eye is guided through a work of art. This can be accomplished by showing figures in motion, or simply through the visual elements.
An Indian illumination — that is, a painting in a hand-made book — from the Akbarnama showing Akbar hunting in an enclosure demonstrates both types. As with the Dürer woodcut, Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, the rider on his horse charges rapidly from left to right across the image. The smaller animals scatter, darting in all directions and also hunting one another. Their movements create a strong sense of movement throughout the image. However, there are formal elements that intensify this.
Diagonals
Just as the horizontal lines behind the riders in the Dürer woodcut suggested their movement forward, so here, lines and colors help convey the motion of people and animals. There is a strong zigzag that brings us from top to bottom, or bottom to top.
Starting at the top-right corner, the fences form a strong diagonal, accompanied by the slash of green representing a stream. These meet at the left edge, where the momentum then follows Akbar on his large white horse, also emphasized by the line of darker earth that moves in a downward diagonal from the horse’s mouth. This motion then again reverses direction, in a downward diagonal, back to the left edge, which in turn bounces back to the bottom right edge.
Our eyes therefore move throughout the image not only because the figures in it are depicted in motion, but also because of the manipulation of the visual elements.
Want to join the conversation?
Is it necessary to always try to find the intent of the painter? Or is it acceptable for the observer to interpret the painting in their own way?(8 votes)
It is not always necessary to try or to find the intent of the painter. One's own interpretation always has a limited validity. Many painters and artists have left no record of their intent, so finding it out is improbable if not impossible. We merely must hold our personal interpretations in an open hand, aware that they are not immutable.(9 votes)
- Knowing where to begin becomes vital to knowing how to read the composition. It's not "centered" anywhere in particular, is it?(8 votes)
It looks like anywhere you start, your eye is led to Akbar and then through the rest of the painting(6 votes)
I must disagree with Dr Mittman's analysis of the illustration. Although I do see movement originating from the top right corner toward Akbar, and then diagonally down-right from there, the movement is not reversed again. The green arrow drawn second-from-the-bottom facing down-left is unsubtantiated. It cuts through a stream of animals who actually move down-left, which is the same direction of the green streak to the left.
I would argue that rather than a zigzag, the movement in the painting is down-left aside from the beginning in the top-right.(8 votes)
At first glance I thought the same thing, but if you take a closer look at the play of light and shadows on the ground beneath the animals, the "dirt" in the enclosure, the second-from-bottom arrow is following a path of light. All the arrows follow a similar path of light because this use of tint and colour creates a subconscious flow in the eye of the onlooker, even if the characters painted on the path are not always aligned with it or all facing the same direction.
Artists often utilize light and shadow in similar ways to this to create direction, movement, and positioning. In general, lighter coloured objects draw more attention and push subjects and areas "towards" the viewer, both in focus and oftentimes (although not so much in this particular painting) as a method of creating the illusion of dimension.(1 vote)
- Knowing where to begin becomes vital to knowing how to read the composition.
It's not ¨centered¨ anywhere in particular, is it?(5 votes) - Looking at the image, is there an explanation about the painting(2 votes)
- I'm sure that there is, but that's not what the lesson is about, so you'll have to look it up elsewhere.(2 votes)
why is it so chaotic(2 votes)
Why does motion have to be portrayed in these specific ways? Why aren't there more ways to portray movement in art?(1 vote)- Certainly, there are many other ways. This lesson was merely about "some" of them.(1 vote)
- Looking at the image, is there an explanation about the painting? Could this be symbolism to animal cruelty, or audience of pupils be prepare for the hunt in the wild?(1 vote)
- from what I know about history, Akhbar the Great was an emperor of the Mughal Empire who was partly known for expanding the empire with his military might, possibly this illumination sort of alludes to that though the subject is of a ceremonial hunt?(1 vote)
- I think that the second arrow going to the lest isn't correct, because there was no motion going to that side, only going to the right side. The motion also still follows to the men wearing colorful clothes outside of the fence. Just wanted to know if these things I just said were right or wrong, thanks!(1 vote)
but why so many arrows(0 votes)