Human practices related to space has two aspects; creation of spaces andrepresentation of them. The theme of this paper is space as it is representedin Western culture. The reason of this choice is the prominance of centeralprojection in spatial representation. It is generally believed that perspec-tive is the climax of the efforts starting with foreshortening in antiquity. Itis also asserted that perspective is the most objective, scientific, realistic,and natural technique of representation compared to these evolved in non-Western cultures. Ready acceptance of perspective in the world provides asupport for the claims to its superiority.However, there is enough evidence showing inadequacy of perspective pro-jection In many respects. Firstly, the geometry on which perspective isbased, that is Euclidean geometry, Is not the geometry of visual space. Allthe experimental findings confirm that physical space is not perceived inEuclidean terms. So, mathematical precission of perspectives cannot be con-sidered as the measure of realism. Any correctly drawn (of computer generated) perspective is equally truewith respect to mathematical principles. But, it is a common experience foreveryone who is familiar with drawings that each correct perspective pro-jection does not provide equivalent visual quality. While some of them seemquite realistic, the others may appear distorted. For this reason strict rulesof perspective are modified even in Renaissance. After the principles of cen-teral projection were formulated by renaissance artists, several problemswere gradually identified. These problems are inevitable because it is im-possible to represent 3-dimensional extension fully on a flat surface. Con-sequently, deformations are inherent in perspective and flatness of the pic-ture plane always presents problem to any technique of drawing.Moreover, there Is rich variety of perception experiments showing insuffi-ciency of pictures relying on monoscopic retinal image. Visual perception ofspace is a dynamic process based on cues of retinal and extra-retinal origin.By utilization of perspective wholeness of perceptual process is neglectedand static Instantaneous retinal Image is overemphasized. Perceptual find-ings point out that projection of a 3-dimensional setting on a flat surface isinadequate for simulation of 3-dimensional percepts.Accumulation of information on problems of perspective and insistance onIts special status is an intriguing paradox. Although perspective was aban-doned in painting In 19th century, it gained superficial validity and objec-tivity by moving Into the field of pure mathematics. Foundation of its math-ematical bases In descriptive geometry, and advancement of photographysupported the views of some theorists who claim that perspective is the besttechnique for correct spatial representation.In spite of detailed information on problems of projection most of the theo-rists working on pictorial representation are perspectivists. Few theoristsasserting conventionality of pictorial representation oppose all the per-spectivist claims. The contrasting views on perspective is a subject thatneeds further investigation. Clarifying the reasons of this theoretical con-troversy will surely cast some light on the problems of perspective andnon-perspective pictures. Then, It will be possible to evaluate properly thenature of representational space both in Western and non-Western cultures.