When science dissects art
|
Ten universal `laws' of art that evoke responses in the brain have been proposed
|
SIMPLICITY PERSONIFIED: Isolation is about under-statement or "less is more", exemplified by this picture of Gandhiji.
THE SMILE of Mona Lisa, the portrait by Leonardo da Vinci, seems to have been decoded. A Dutch emotion-recognition programme has determined that her smile is 83 per cent happy, 9 per cent disgusted, 6 per cent fearful and 2 per cent angry.
A Japanese forensics expert has studied her skeletal structure and deduced her voice using this, and claims it was low for a woman. Another researcher analysed the position of her hands folded over her body and declared that she was pregnant.
Marvellous science
Why is her stare so enigmatic? Italian researchers say that da Vinci used a special blurring technique to create shadows near her eyes and mouth in order to produce this effect. One cannot but marvel at the power of science in this connection.
Be that as it may, why are we attracted by art — pictures, paintings, sculptures, music?
What is it in them that appeals to us? The noted neuroscientist Vilayanur Subramanian Ramachandran of San Diego has attempted to answer this question, using the principles of cognitive neurosciences.
He has put together a set of his BBC Reith Lectures in a book entitled `A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness' (Pi Press, New York, 2004).
In his lecture called `The Artful Brain,' he attempts to analyse whether there are such things as artistic universals that cut across cultures and form the fundamental basis of appeal to the human brain. (You can also hear his Reith Lecture on this topic at (www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2003/ram/lecture3.ram)
Clearly cultural diversity accounts for varied styles such as Aboriginal art, Impressionism, Moghul miniatures, minimalism, abstract art and so forth. Artistic universals are those basic features that cut across cultural boundaries and specific styles and forms of art.
Ramachandran asks that even if culture accounts for over 90 per cent of the variance in art, would there be at least 10 per cent universality in it, which is common to all brains?
He believes that there is such universality. He further proposes ten universal `laws' of art, or basic features that evoke responses in the human brain.
These are (1) peak shift, (2) grouping, (3) contrast, (4) isolation, (5) perceptual problem solving, (6) symmetry, (7) abhorrence of coincidence/generic viewpoint, (8) repetition, rhythm and orderliness, (9) balance and (10) metaphor. These might be thought of as the ten features that form the basis of `neuroaesthetics.' And they may well have an evolutionary origin and basis.
Some of these features, notably 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are easily appreciated but others need a little elaboration. Peak shift is a form of selective exaggeration.
Ramachandran illustrates this with the example of the bronze statue of Goddess Parvathi — the very epitome of feminine beauty, grace, dignity and poise.
Pleasing effect
The exaggeration is on the bust and the `tribhanga' posture (head tilted one way, the body the opposite way and the hips again the other way). The selective, albeit unrealistic, exaggeration creates a pleasing effect on the brain.
Indeed, it is the peak shift principle that operates in our appreciation of cubists and Picasso — two different views of a face (frontal and profile) superimposed on the same canvas, in the same visual field.
What about grouping? Ramachandran asks: "For example, you go shopping and pick out a scarf with red splotches on it. Then you look for a skirt, which also has some red splotches on it. Why? I believe it is telling you something very deep, something to do with the way the brain evolved".
Grouping links objects and visual images, brings them together and evokes an "a-ha" resolution response in the brain. What an artist tries to do is to generate as many of these "a-ha" signals in as many visual areas as possible.
Perceptual problem-solving or visual peek-a-boo is another mode of generating the "a-ha" reaction.
This too has a neural evolutionary basis. "Vision evolved mainly to discover objects and to defeat camouflage. The wiring of our visual centres to our emotional centres ensures that the very act of searching for the solution is pleasing, just as struggling with a jigsaw puzzle is pleasing long before the final "a-ha". Art may be thought of as a form of visual foreplay before the climax". Isolation is about understatement or "less is more", exemplified by the single line of the bald head and neck plus the glasses picture of Gandhiji or the simple sinuous outline of a nude. Such understatement appears to be the opposite of exaggeration. But it still focuses on attention, and attention to the relevant detail.
He points out that the principle of isolation and attention might also explain the exceptional talent that some children afflicted with autism possess in one given area of activity.
Autistic persons unfortunately have several areas of brain damaged so that they are retarded in many respects. Yet, each of them has one preserved island of extraordinary talent.
This might be in mathematics, music, painting or whatever. Ramachandran cites the example of an artistic girl, Nadia, who could paint astonishingly well, and shows how her drawing of a horse was even superior to that of da Vinci.
Provocative, scholarly
He argues that Nadia's brain spontaneously allocated all her attentional resources to the one module that is still functioning, the part of the brain concerned with art.
This is but a short summary of Professor Ramachandran's essay, and I urge the readers to read his book, or listen to his Reith Lecture, or print it out and ponder over this provocative and scholarly talk.
D. BALASUBRAMANIAN
dbala@lvpei.org
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Sci Tech
