Quoted Text
I agree Mike, very well explained.
But just a thought, how about one of these small round bases with two figures on it without any vehicles. What would it be considered?
Well, I would say that it all depends on if the modeler intends to tell a story or not.
This is just the "world according to Mike," but I think of it like this:
Suppose a modeler displays a single figure on a landscaped base. Is he telling a story or just showing off the figure for the interest of the figure itself (pure aesthetics)? I believe that usually, he's constructed (maybe even sculpted) the figure and painted it to show off the interesting uniform, the accoutrements, individual weapon, etc. The purpose and intent is to show off the aesthetics of the subject (here a single figure).
Of course, the figure may be posed in a manner that's interesting and its facial features and expression may be very eye-catching, but the purpose of the figure display is to show off the aesthetics of the figure. To me the vignette is like a still life or landscape painting. The work was created to show off the aesthetic of the subject.
Now, say the modeler puts two figures on a base. we now have to ask how those figures are interacting with each other and their environment and circumstances. Posses where the figures are just "existing in their" soldierly circumstances (talking, looking, pointing, perhaps even firing their weapons) are really, IMO, just extensions of the aesthetic interest of the uniforms and equipment of the single figure.
(After all, the single figure could be firing his weapon as well, but we probably wouldn't think of a single figure firing a rifle as a figure diorama with a story.)
However, if the two figures were posed, say with one treating the wounds of the other, or they were cowering behind cover from enemy fire, or perhaps boxing with each other in hand-to-hand combat, then the main focus of the display becomes the interaction of the two figures and that interaction tells a story. In my book, this example would be a two-figure diorama.
The modeler is telling a story about tender care of a wounded comrade (or perhaps mercy to an enemy soldier); or the modeler is telling a story about the fear men under fire experience; or perhaps he's telling the story of a desperate fight to the death. The models are the medium that the model artist is using to tell his story just like an author uses words to tell his story. The book is not about the words and diorama is not about the model figures.
Of course, the viewer might find a story in the simple two figure vignette where the builder doesn't intend one. The viewer might imagine that the two figures standing next to each other and talking or pointing are involved in devising some heroic battle plan, or scheming about how much booze they're going to drink and how many girls they'll woo while on leave in Paris.
We intuitively understand that all humans have a story to tell about themselves all the time. The nature of human existence means that observers can always find a "story" in every person they see, even the person (or model figure subject) that's simply sitting still.
In the end, though, the modeler can only build and display his models according to his vision and imagination. The viewer will perceive what he will when he looks at the model, even if this means the view finds things the modeler didn't intend.
However, art (even model art) is not an exercise in democracy. It's not the viewer's vote that counts, but the modeler's (the artist's) intent and vision that's most important.
The modeler tells his story or shows off what he believes is most aesthetically appealing in his subjects. Once the work is finished, the viewer will either understand the modeler's intent and vision or not, but that intent and vision was the genesis of the work of art.
Whether the modeler is successful in conveying his intent and vision is, of course, important, but what that intent is (diorama and story or vignette and pure aesthetics) has not changed because the model artist was or was not successful and the viewer did or did not perceive the work as intended.
To be sure there are gray areas here - works that clearly convey a story even if the builder calls them vignettes and also works that have no discernible story even though the builder says he's telling one and works that the builder says are intended to tell one story but are perceived as telling a different one. This is why crafting rules sets for contests and judging of dioramas and vignettes is so difficult.
The judges are viewers whose votes do count...
Still, I think the model artist's intent and vision are the most important factor in determining whether a work is a diorama or a vignette.
