The third assumption of these interpretations is that narrative structure is a coherent structure with a given temporal order, which the viewer extracts from the painting. That is to say, narrative, by definition, is a unified meta-structure binding a series of events connected by temporal and causal connections. Similar to literary theories which assume that narrative structure exists on a progressive time axis, even if this axis may be deviated from or undermined while being represented in the poetic text, visual narrative according to this thinking is what Lessing defined as a “pregnant moment”, that is, a temporal sequence compressed into a single image represented in a picture. Thus, for example, one of the interpreters of Las Meninas suggests a narrative reading of the painting according to which the characters are about to leave the room. He bases this claim on the male figure at the rear door, shifting the curtain for the exiting figures, and on the dwarf who kicks the dog to wake him in order to leave the room.
The fourth assumption underlying the interpretations mentioned is that the act of seeing is being conducted by a unified subject controlling her field of vision, who is sharply distinct from the object of observation, whether she is external or internal to the painting. As mentioned above, traditional theories of painting assume relations of observation in which the painting is fully available to the viewing subject, and the relations between subject and painting are distinct and defined. This assumption can be found in interpretations that regard Las Meninas as a representation of a historical scene taking place at the royal palace, and assuming an external viewer of the painting, as well as in interpretations assuming that the viewing subject is somehow involved in the picture, internal to it. The former viewer can be found in the many interpretations referring to the perspectival representation of Las Meninas, which strives to reconstruct the original distance which apparently existed between the painter and the painted object. The latter viewer can be found in one of the interpretations claiming that Las Meninas is a painting painted for the king, its original and ultimate viewer, who is reflected in the rear mirror. In this case, the picture establishes the king’s sovereign position for him. The viewer thus stands, so to speak, in the king’s shoes, seeing the picture from his point of view (Schmitter 263). It should be noted that in both cases, whether an internal or an external viewer, a sharp distinction exists between the painting and the observer.
These four assumptions are based on current procedures of analyzing the term narrative and on models of painting interpretation. But does the thinking about narrativity in visual terms necessarily pass through these hypotheses, designed on the basis of the verbal poetic medium? Can painting, with its unique presence, offer an alternative way of thinking about narrativity? In what follows I suggest a new theory of narrativity in the visual field. I propose that narrativity in the visual field is not a by-product of the literary characteristics of the image. Instead, I deduce this narrativity from the unique characteristics of the visual field including the process of viewing (rather then reading).
). As soon as I think of painting, and especially of Picasso, I think of Brian Regan.
