Pages

Saturday, April 27, 2013

How the Brain Responds to Ambiguity in Art

"The images in art, like all images, represent not so much reality as the viewer's perceptions, imaginations, expectations, and knowledge of other images--images recalled from memory." --neuropsychiatrist Eric Kandel

The Beholder's Response: How the Brain Responds to Ambiguity in Art | Think Tank | Big Think" . . . the creative process of the artist parallels the creative operations of the human brain in everyday life, a subject that Kandel explores in depth in The Age of Insight: The Quest to Understand the Unconscious in Art, Mind, and Brain, from Vienna 1900 to the Present. Art evolved, and found ways to more deeply engage the beholder . . .This is a significant break from early Renaissance art that is directed inward. . . The Austrian psychoanalyst Ernst Kris studied the idea of the beholder's response very rigorously. Kris concluded that great works are great "because they are ambiguous." In other words, they allow for alternative readings. . . so while the artist exercises creativity in producing the image, "you, yourself, generate a fair amount of creativity in reconstructing it in your head and reconstructing it in a way that is unique for you and it’s slightly different for me," Kandel says. "This was a remarkable insight and has really given rise to the sort of the current understanding of what goes on in our head." For instance, what is the meaning of Mona Lisa's expression? The great ambiguity in the portrait lends itself to different interpretations, and that is what makes it a masterful work. "If you focus on it with central vision, which sees detail, you don’t see the smile," Kandel points out. And yet, "if you focus on peripheral vision, which sees the broad outlines, you do better at seeing the smile."" (more at link above)




No comments:

NYTimes: Art & Design