Soyöz, Ufuk2021-05-152021-05-1520151590-58961522-4600https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-015-0256-6https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12939/576Soyoz, Ufuk/0000-0001-9550-5279The optical measures have often been explained within the conceptual framework provided by Vitruvius: the "true" symmetries are distorted by space. Hence they have to be corrected by optical measures under the "real" conditions of appearance. While scholars have studied the phenomenon of optical measures within a narrowly mathematical framework, the aesthetic implications of Vitruvius' claim, his ambiguous use of the "truth" and "reality" has hardly been noticed. By situating the phenomenon of architectural proportions within the broader aesthetic discourse on Hellenistic art, this paper shall reveal the paradox of discourse between the optical knowledge and professional power of the architect. Rather than being a means to a quintessential truth or reality, the paper shall demonstrate how indeed optical measures were employed as a means to stylistic ends; that the change in the proportions of temple architecture from the Classical to the Hellenistic age predicates a painterly taste.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessDesignOptical MeasuresCurvatureEntasisProportional DesignArticle10.1007/s00004-015-0256-61725255452-s2.0-84937811725Q1WOS:000358217400009Q2