What do we mean by multi-dimensional, anyway?
3D: contemplating what this is and what it means. 3-dimensionality in an object is always implied when a photograph is taken of the object. It’s a given that the object is three-dimensional. Why else would you take a photograph, but to transform the object’s untouchable and immutable qualities to another more accessible medium? Similarly, with paintings, the form depicted tells us of its dimensions and curves and edges only in relation to its environment. We know that in a still life the items illustrated are three-dimensional. Elsewhere, not on the canvas, the items depicted were experienced by the artist as objects with a back and a side which we cannot see from the side we are shown on canvas.
2D: a flat image which can allude to the properties of those held by a three-dimensional object in space, without actually possessing the same qualities of the object described. Two-dimensional means that there is height and length, but no width.
1-dimensional: when I say ‘one-dimensional’, I think of a line, or a person. Rather than an object with a singular property and no more, the idea itself seems so vastly abstract that it essentially ceases to exist as a concept in my mind. Comparing this with the concept of infinity, when something goes on and on and on and on and on… the vastness of space. I am a human, a tiny human on an island in a sea on this diminutive planet. And this planet is but one in a galaxy – that galaxy is but a speck of dust caught in a sunbeam from a distant star.
The singular line, in comparison with the infinite, fades away into the recesses of the mind.