This paper involves a post-analytic approach to phenomenology. It addresses the structure and content of arguments, and strives to explain basic terms rather than take them as they are given, or to offer explanation based on reference to ideas from cognate thinkers. In Part One, Merleau-Ponty's basic philosophical position is outlined. Part Two shows why he takes painting to have a special role in disclosing the character of our visual inherence in the world. Part Three presents a critical review of Merleau-Ponty's position. It underlines the strengths of his theory, but identifies significant limitations, also. These center on his inability to analyze features that are distinctive to painting as a pictorial format (namely, planar structures that intervene on, and transforms, our normal visual perception of things). The significance of these features is explained, at length. In Conclusion, I offer a theory of painting's historicity that is fuller than Merleau-Ponty's.