exploring “relativity”

art critique, the analysis of artworks in formal procedure, is the path which connects the public to the art productions; and although its main aim is to judge the piece, right or wrong, delightful or ugly, the main benefit of this effort is to make the subject comprehensible. to achieve this goal, the art critic should interpret the subject thoroughly, relying on the art production as the main source of research, rather than looking into the texts dealing with the subjects such as artist’s biography or the social condition of the time which the artist was living in. the tools for this important task is the “keen eye” and the “pure feeling” of the art critic. exploring “relativity”, developed by the attitude mentioned above, isbased upon a known artwork of the famous dutch artist: mauritscornelisescher (1898-1972). “relativity” which was created in 1953 in two versions, is a black and white miniature with small size (72.2*29.3cm), in which three forces of gravity are working perpendicularly to one another. these earth-planes cut across each other at right angles; and human beings and other objects are living on each of them. as a matter of fact it is impossible for the inhabitants of different world to walk, sit or stand on the same floor, because they have differing conceptions of what is horizontal and what is vertical;yet they may well share the use of the same staircases. “relativity” is one of the five pieces which was named “relativities” by the artist himself. the other four pieces are: “another world”, “high and low”, “curl up” and “house of stairs”. the first two were created in 1947 and the last two in 1951; all of them before the production of “relativity”. with a search in the artist’s other productions, one can find other art works, in other categories, which share strong similarities with “relativities”. “belvedere” (1958), “ascending and descending” (1960) and “water fall” (1961) are good examples for this purpose. in this article, after a brief introduction, the authors give a general statement above the whole composition, describing its most important characteristics. then the figures of the play, which are defined by numbers to be recognizable, are introduced; describing their qualities, with looking to their details: the number of things, the locations, the shapes, cloths, gestures and features; the genders, the materials, the angle of shades and so forth. followings this inspection, the authors state the conclusion, and demonstrate the key figures of the play which were purposefully neglected. the final part of the article is specified to the m.c.escher’s main ideas, since the interpretation of “relativity” reveals the artist’s general intentions. in this final statement authors claim that escher was a quite different artist comparing to modern movement’s icons such as publo picasso, piet mondrian or jackson pollock;since while these artists were devoted to the idea of “abstraction” escher’s art is explicitly meaningful and narrator. it is interesting to know that escher was very eager to see the observers searching in the meaning of hisproductions; and that is what this article is all about.