- Visual
Thinking
- Visual
Thinking--the Highest Sense
- Theoretical
Thinking
- Visual
Dynamic
- Homeostatic
Equilibrium
- Entropy
- On
Photography
- Outside
In--Environment-Driven
- Limitations
of Visual Dynamic
- Natural
Accident
- Particularity
- Paralyzing
Expression
- Conclusion
- References
How is the
psychology of art related to photography? When I mention the psychology
of art, many people may think it is a type of experimental psychology
that studies human perception of color and composition, which would
seem to have a natural connection to photography. Interestingly enough,
the arguably most well-known psychologist of art, Rudolf Arnheim, is
not an experimental psychologist. With the exception of his
dissertation and one or two other writings, he has never published an
experimental study (Verstegen, 1996). Instead, throughout his career he
has "philosophized" a psychology of art. Arnheim, a German immigrant to
America, studied psychology at the University of Berlin during the
1920s. At that time psychology was considered a branch of philosophy
(Behrens, 1998).
During
Arnheim's career, he wrote 15 books and numerous papers on the
psychology of art. He conducted research and taught in major American
universities such as Columbia and Harvard. In addition, he served twice
as the President of the American Society for Aesthetics, and served
three terms as the President of the "Division on Psychology and the
Arts" of the American Psychological Association. The fact that Arnheim
is such a prominent figure in the study of art makes his criticism of
photography especially problematic. I hope that this article can give
photographers sufficient knowledge to critique Arnheim's viewpoint.
The objective
of this article is to introduce and criticize Arnheim's
"philosophical/psychological" view of photography. To comprehend his
view of photography, a general overview of his psychology of art is
essential also. "Dynamic" expression is the theme of Arnheim's theory.
In his theory, the more visual tensions an artist presents, the more
dynamic expression the work carries. Arnheim believes that photography
is not as dynamic as painting because photography is too
environment-driven to grasp the essence of a subject or express the
authentic personality of a model. In the following, I will outline the
fundamental concepts of Arnheim's theory and give a brief critique to
some of his views.
The pursuit of
logic and rationality prevails in Western culture. Arnheim (1974)
asserted that Western culture is "unsuited to the creation of art and
encourages the wrong kind of thinking about it. We have neglected the
gift of comprehending things through our senses. Concept is divorced
from percept, and thoughts move among abstractions." (p.1) He insists
that visual thinking cannot be conveyed by verbal language. For
instance, the entire experience created by a Rembrandt painting could
not and should not reduced to description and explanation (pp.1-2).
Arnheim
(1979) agrees with philosopher Wittgenstein that words are like the
skin of a deep water, [so] we must penetrate beneath the skin. And
Arnheim even goes further to claim that humans' highest sense is the
sense of vision (p.146). Moreover, Arnheim (1986) is opposed to the
notion that intuition is just artists' effortless inspiration while
intellect is a kind of serious logical thinking. Actually, he says,
intellect is a linear or sequential analysis, while
intuition is a synthesis of the entire structure.
Intuition enables us to perceive and interpret the relations between
various elements of a subject (pp.13-30). *
Fortunately,
Arnheim does not go to the extreme to exclude conceptual thinking from
artistic activities. In Arnheim's view (1969), intuition or visual
thinking is by no means a sufficient condition for artistic creation.
Genuine artwork requires organization, which involves many, and perhaps
all, of the cognitive operations of theoretical thinking (p.263).
Perceptually, a mature work reflects a highly differentiated sense of
form, capable of organizing various components of the image in a
comprehensive compositional order. The intelligence of the artist is
apparent not only in the structure of the formal pattern, but equally
in the depth of meaning conveyed by this pattern (p. 269).
In brief, the
work of art is an interplay of vision and thought.
The individuality of particular existence and the generality of types
are united in one image. Percept and concept are revealed as two
aspects of one and the same experience (p.273).
Arnheim
(1988, Nov.- Dec.) asserts that the world of sensory experience is not
made up of things, but of dynamic force. The key to expression in
visual art is the rendering of dynamic forces in fixed images.
Expression is the manifestation of life, and life is what art is all
about (p.585).
For example,
different lengths and positions in line-drawing faces would give
different impressions to observers--a face that has long lines in close
proximity would seem aged, sad, and mean (see Figure 1a); a face that
has shorter, farther apart lines would seem youthful and serene (see
Figure 1b). These are the result of perceived contradictions and
expansions.
Arnheim (1974) states that these visual forces are physically and
psychologically real, not merely figures of speech. Psychologically,
the interplay of forces in a picture exists in the experience of any
person who looks at it. Since these forces have a point of attack, a
direction, and an intensity, they meet the conditions established by
physicists for physical forces (p.16).
Figure 1. A mean face and a serene face
Arnheim
adopted the assumption that human mind operates on the infrastructure
of a homeostatic equilibrium, and any stimulation from the outside or
inside of an organism will upset the balance of that basic state and
lead directly to a countermove (1988, Nov-Dec., p.588). For an
organism, pleasure results from reductions of tension
or a balance of drive. Visual pleasure works in the
same way. **
Arnheim
(1974) also uses the analogy of physics to explain the vitality of
visual forces in art. In physics the principle of entropy, also known
as the second law of Thermodynamics, asserts that in any isolated
system, each successive state represents an irreversible decrease of
active energy. The universe tends toward a state of equilibrium in
which all existing asymmetries of distribution are eliminated (p.36).
Art is but one manifestation of this universal tendency towards the
state of simplest structure in physical systems (Arnheim, 1971, p.255).
Arnheim built
his theory of visual dynamic basing upon mainly painting, sculpture and
music. He regards photography as less dynamic than these arts. The
characteristics of photography in Arnheim's theory could be described
as the following:
First, the
nature of painting does not derive from its subject matter, but from
the media in which it is created: the sheet of paper, the canvas, the
stone, and the tools and materials. On the contrary, photography
springs from the environment. Arnheim describes the difference with
this phrase: "Painting and sculpture come from the inside out;
photography comes from outside in" (Arnheim, 1986, p.115-116). We might
say that painting and sculpture are "media-driven," but photography is
"environment-driven."
As a
photographer, I believe that photography is not necessarily "outside
in." Equipped with three Nikon cameras, eight lenses, fifty filters and
some other accessories, I always take the media as the first
consideration when I decide what I will do with the subject. Basically,
all forms of art are the materialization of ideas.
In other words, all arts fall along a media-environment
continuum.
Because
Arnheim believes that photography is from the outside in, it is said to
be less expressive in the sense of containing the visual tensions of
the subject. Arnheim (1979) asserts that photography, in spite of its
authenticity, is not the best tool to enhance visual thinking; rarely
will it do the job without the help of other means such as schematic
drawings, graphs, etc. Visual education, in Arnheim's view, must be a
statement of what is happening. A sequence is shown by visible
continuity. Cause and effect are shown by an observable proximity in
time or space or both. According to Arnheim, photographs cannot show
such things as well as other media (p.148).
Aesthetical
visual forms contain directed tensions, or visual dynamic. They
represent a happening rather than a being. Thus, a good picture of
football players shows intense action, while a poor one makes the
figures look awkwardly arrested in midair (Arnheim, 1979, p.75). In
Arnheim's view, it is more likely for a painter to create visual
tensions, but for photographers, the reality of a physical subject
comprises the total course of its existence in time. To render it in
the timeless medium of painting, the artist may translate a synthesis
of the time sequence into an appropriate immobile image. For that same
image, the photographer is limited to selecting a momentary phase of
the sequence. Thus, according to Arnheim, a photograph might not carry
the most dynamic elements of that event ( 1986, p.117).
Arnheim's
opinion might be correct in regard to early photography, but today
quite a few cameras are capable of track focusing and continuous
shooting. Catching the crucial moment of an event is no longer
difficult. Moreover, even a traditional camera is able to record the
motion of an image with a long exposure. Once a photographer mounted a
Nikon N6006 on his bicycle while cycling at night. His picture reveals
a sense of time sequence, and the visual tensions are clearly displayed
through the sharp and blurred subjects.
According to
Arnheim (1979), environment-driven photography carries a property of
"natural accident." Impressionists, who were inspired by photographs,
departed from classic orderliness and stillness in their painting
styles and experimented with the composition of natural accident to
portray indifference, isolation and unawareness. Nonetheless, the
so-called accident was the intent of the artists and under their
control.
However,
Arnheim does not consider natural accident in photography as
successfully controlled as it is in Impressionist paintings.
Photography introduces accident into every one of its products. A photo
is never more than partially comprehensive to the human eye. Therefore,
as a medium of art, photography will always suffer from the inherent
compromise, Arnheim argues (p.170).
Because
photography is said to be environment-driven, Arnheim (1986) considers
it an art of particularity rather than an expression of universality.
He asserts that painters are inclined to start from a highly abstract
level and would reach individuality only by special elaboration.
Photography, on the other hand, would have a hard time presenting an
abstraction. Instead of stating abstractness positively, it can only
arrive at it negatively, by eliminating some of the primary data
(p.116).
In
photography, the detailed rendering of an individual human body is
common. A normally focused shot of a human body displays all the
imperfections of the model, unless the photographer searches for the
rare specimen of perfection such as a glamorous young woman or a
well-built athlete. These images are ideals, like their counterparts in
painting and sculpture, but given the difference in medium, their
connotation is not the same. Arnheim says:
The photographic documents are
not the creations of an idealizing imagination that responds to the
imperfections of reality with a dream of beauty. Instead, they are the
trophies of a hunter who looks for the unusual in the world of what
actually exists and discovered something exceptionally good. (1986,
p.121)
Furthermore,
since photographs are reproductions of what really happened in a
particular time and space, they are not self-explanatory. Their meaning
depends on the total context of which they are a part. When photography
wishes to convey a message, it must try to place the image into the
proper context. Usually this will require the help of the written or
spoken word (Arnheim, 1986, p.119).
John Berger
also states that photography is an art of "ambiguity." Without the aid
of captions, the audience always interprets photos in a way that is
completely different from what they really are or what they originally
mean. I totally agree with Arnheim that photography is an art of
particularity rather than universality. Again taking the human figure
as an example, the nude photos of Man Ray and Alfred Stiegitz are quite
different. The nudes in Man Ray's album are expressed in the European
style while the latter ones are American. Perhaps Ray and Stiegitz did
not deliberately embody their arts in certain cultural styles, but the
women in their pictures definitely carry those particular traits.
Arnheim
(1979) considers photography an improper medium to express a person's
personality. He has said:
The presence
of a portrait photographer's camera tends to paralyze a person's
expression, so that he becomes self-conscious, inhibited, and strikes
an unnatural pose. Candid shots are momentary phases isolated in time
and space from the action and setting of which they are a part.
Sometimes they are highly expressive and representative of the whole
from which they are taken. Frequently, they are not. Furthermore, the
angle from which a shot is made, the effect of lighting on shape, the
rendering of brightness and color values, as well as modifications
through retouching, are factors that make it impossible to accept a
random photograph as a valid likeness. (p.55)
This argument
puzzles me. On one hand, Arnheim criticizes photography for lacking
visual dynamic and carrying disorganized natural accident because it is
from "outside in" and the manipulation of media is not sufficient. On
the other hand, he says that photography cannot truly express a
person's essence because it has too much artist intervention and
manipulation. It seems to be contradictory. Actually, artificial
procedures in photography such as switching angles and retouching might
contribute to a valid likeness. Furthermore, psychologists generally
agree that one's personality is situational rather than stable. It is
doubtful that we can find one "right" representation of anyone's
personality. On one occasion perhaps a snapshot of a natural accident
shows an expressive gesture of a person vividly, but at another time a
picture taken in a studio setup may manifest his/her essence clearly.
Sometimes a painter can reveal the very nature of a person in a
particular situation, but a photographer might handle this job better
under another circumstances.
When such a prominent
psychologist of art as Arnheim is so critical of photography, it is no
wonder that even now photography is not highly regarded as a type of
fine art. Nonetheless, we should not fully accept his theory without
careful examination. His theory of visual dynamic is based on the
assumptions of homeostatic equilibrium and entropy, which are believed
to be universal principles in the human world and the universe.
However, I wonder whether visual forces as a major criterion in art is
universal or cultural. I agree with Arnheim that photography is an art
of particularity, but this doesn't mean that photography must be from
"outside in." In Arnheim's theory, if photography has too much natural
accident, it will hardly carry visual dynamic. But if it has too much
photographer intervention and manipulation of the subject, it will
paralyze the expression of the subject's essence. Perhaps it is the
photographer's mission to strive for a balance between these tensions.
Notes
* Although
Arnheim's theory is so insightful as to point out the inadequacy of
verbal cognition, the dichotomy of visual thinking and verbal thinking
still oversimplifies the breadth of human cognition. According to
Howard Gardner, human intelligence can be classified into seven
dimensions, namely artistic, linguistic, kinesthetic, mathematic,
musical, interpersonal and intrapersonal (Gardner, 1991). I believe
that this is a more comprehensive approach to look at human cognition.
In addition,
it is debatable whether visual thinking is the highest form of
cognition. Albert Bandura (1986) insists that mental image and verbal
memory are interrelated but most of our information is stored in verbal
form (p.58). Jean Piaget asserts that the development of human
cognition progresses from the dependence on sensory input to the
dependence on concepts (cited in Hergenhann, 1988, pp.271-288). Some
psychologists distinguish field dependent from field independent
thinkers. Field dependence refers to cognition based upon a
clearly-defined visual object, while field independence is defined as
perception without distraction or confusion by the environment.
Interestingly enough, field independence is considered the higher
cognitive skill of the two (cited in Hettinger, 1988). In short, it is
doubtful that the inference that visual sense is the highest form of
cognition would be supported by most psychologists.
** The model
of homeostatic equilibrium was also accepted by Sigmund Freud and
Edward Hull. Today this model is no longer popular in psychology
because psychologists found that theories of Freud and Hull are hardly
applicable to the real world. It is no guarantee that we can maximize
our pleasure even if we make the greatest effort to reduce tensions.
John Atkinson (1965) classifies personality traits into two categories,
namely tendency to succeed and tendency to avoid failure (p.73). For
the former, tensions might be a source of pleasure!
Regarding
visual arts, Oriental paintings, in value contrast, color hues and
composition, are often less tensed than their Western counterparts. I
doubt that visual tensions as the major criterion in art is universal.
Arnheim, R.
(1969). Visual thinking. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Press.
_____.
(1971). Entropy and art: An essay on disorder and order.
Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
_____.
(1974). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the
creative eye. Los Angeles, CA: University of California
Press.
_____. (1979)
Toward a psychology of art. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Press.
_____.
(1986). New essays on the psychology of art. Los
Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
_____. (1988
Nov.-Dec.). Visual dynamics. American Scientist, 6,
585- 591.
Atkinson, J.
W. (1965). The mainsprings of achievement oriented activity. In J. D.
Krumboltz (Ed.), Learning and the Educational Process (pp.25-38,
48-66). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Behrens, R.
(1998). Rudolf Arnheim: The little owl on the shoulder of Athene. Leonardo,
31, 231-233.
Gardner, H.
(1991). Multiple intelligences: Theory and practice.
New York: Basic Books.
Hergenhann,
B. R. (1988). An introduction to learning theories.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hettinger, G.
(1988). Operationalizing cognitive constructs in the design
of computer-based instruction. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana
State University Press.
Verstegen, I.
(1996). The thought, life, and influence of Rudolf Arnheim. Genetic,
Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 122, 197-214.
Copyright ©
Navigation
