The discussion is perspective and the West's love affair with linear perspective. So ingrained in most Westerners is the identification of linear perspective with reality, that all other art tends to be judged on the basis of it. In the case of "modern art" this may be justified; but in the case of Christian art it is most assuredly not justified. Two snippets are reproduced below to arouse your interest.
We are so used to linear perspective that we unthinkingly identify it with realism; to modern eyes, a "realistic" painting is one painted in linear perspective. Some may argue that the resemblance of such a painting to a photograph is proof of its realism. But this begs the question; had we not already been accustomed to consider perspectival painting the standard of realism, we might never have accepted photography as realistic either. I can imagine an ancient Egyptian sage inventing the camera, and upon discovering that it did not always show the human figure in profile concluding that it did not work very well. ...Check out the full post here!
In the mediaeval mind, hierarchy, rhythm and number are the fundamental laws of the universe. Art was painted and drawn and woven in the same manner that literature was written and the natural world was observed; symbolism was the animating principle. The literal is only one of four senses of reality; the allegorical, tropological and anagogical senses are equally real, and equally necessary to depict....
Then look up "Reverse Perspective" on Google or Yahoo.