Who decides?
Upon viewing a work of art, we begin a discussion within ourselves that leads us to a conclusive opinion.
A series of observations are made as to purely visual elements such as form, content, colour, rhythm, composition, as well as historical/literary content and whether or not there is a common text that relates back to suggested ways of understanding the intended message (the Bible or classical literature, i.e. common themes that speak to a homogenous public).
Finally we form an opinion regarding what we see, but can we trust our thoughts or are we being deliberately lead to our conclusion?
While continuing my research into neuroaesthetics, I came across an article in The Globe & Mail (February 23, 2012 by Anne McIlroy) who was reporting on the work of Toronto psychologist Oshin Vartanian.
His work on aesthetic appreciation in music and the visual arts revealed something very interesting.
The area most associated with aesthetics appears to be the amygdala, an almond-shaped mass of nuclei that is part of the limbic system. This is the part of the brain that regulates emotions, fear, anger, memory and reaction to danger.
Another area Dr. Vartanian found involved is the orbitofrontal cortex, which is associated with pleasant smells and tastes – it is our reward and pleasure centre. The third area lighting up while enjoying art is the anterior insula that is activated by visceral emotional experiences.
One artist who has worked to touch these areas of our brains is Olafur Eliasson, known for “his mood-altering installations of water, air, and light.” In his laboratory for spatial research, he uses these elements with the idea of achieving an enhanced experience for the viewer.
Could neuroaesthetics explain the experience that coined the Stendhal Syndrome? “…described as a psychosomatic illness that causes rapid heartbeat, fainting, confusion and even hallucinations in people who are exposed to extraordinary artistic achievement, whether it is paintings or sculptures.
Although psychiatrists have long debated whether it really exists, its effects on some sufferers are serious enough for them to require treatment in hospital and even antidepressants.”[1]
And what about the use of colour therapy in the media or even in choosing the colour of the walls in hospitals? Are certain areas of the brain being stimulated?
Art is as complex as people are. To rely purely on sensory input is not only insufficient, but may prove misleading.
In appreciating a work of art we must consider as many of the variables as possible, such as its historical context, the zeitgeist or mood of the times within which the artwork was created, the moral and social implications.
Even our own personal history and knowledge will play a significant role in our reception of the work of art. What we bring to the table matters.
Can our brains be stimulated beyond rationality and override it?
By Boky and Blake
[1] The Telegraph by Nick Squires 28 Jul 2010