mikeh wrote:Before we get off the table topic entirely, I can't resist posting de Gebelin's artist's version of the card, 1781, from trionfi.com's reproduction.
Not only are there four legs (and half a purse), but the poor guy's foot is in front of the front table leg!
mmfilesi wrote:My favorite magician ^^
Like Debra, I see this as part of the art... and has as been mentioned already, the woodcarver shows many examples in which the perspective is rather wonky.
In this case, it's not only the 'length' and location of the single table leg, but also the surface of the table (everyone would slide off!).
Perhaps I missed it, as I have not read the whole thread, but there's also another possibility: that the table has three intended legs, with the single one placed in the middle of the right-hand side. Three-legged tables are, in any case, far more stable on un-even ground.
I am not suggesting that this was the likely intent, by the way.
Personally, I consider that the main image was to show the Bateleur and his wares on the table top. To show this maximally, the table top had to be extended as much as possible, thereby causing part of its corner to be outside the frame. As the legs were drawn, usage of the available space below was probably of greater importance than whether or not the perspective was correct.
Given the nature of the type of legs, I suspect that the artist 'imagined' it with four legs, one out of frame, with the whole drawn rather crudely (as with numerous other cards).
Thanks, Debra. I (viewtopic.php?f=23&t=388&start=0#p6604) think the Dodal, "Chosson," and especially the Conver Pope cards suggest something important outside the frame--ambiguously, to be sure, just as in the case of the Magician.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest