User:Annalystad/essaytri2

Essay Trim2 'Gestalt and Art'

Anna-Lena Lystad 21.03.2017 Essay Trimester 2

Gestalt - Affect - Feelings - Emotion

Rudolf Arnheim was an author, art and film theorist, and a perceptual psychologist - born in Germany in 1904. At the University of Berlin he studied Gestalt psychology under Max Wertheimer, and Wolfgang Kohler. Arnheim published several books such as Visual Thinking (1969), The Power of the Center: A Study of Composition in the Visual Arts (1982), but he is most known for Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye (1954).

With this essay I will spend most of the time discussing Rudolf Arnheims Gestalt theory, where I am hoping to get a higher understanding of the concept and later on figure out how it may relate to Affect. I will be using an article Arnheim wrote for The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, and comparing it to Eric Shouse’ “Feeling, Emotion, Affect”. In Arnheim's chapter on Gestalt and Art for The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism he explains how this is merely a style of science as well as in art. Max Wertheimer, Wolfgang Köhler, and Kurt Koffka created this theory which was originally used as a method in psychology, physics, biology and sociology. The theory is ‘the description of the structural features, the whole-qualities of “systems”, i.e., of those natural things or happenings in which the character and function of any part is determined by the total situation.’ (Arnheim 1943, p 71). Arnheim explains it as how it changes the view of an organism, instead of thinking rationally about this one specific subject as just for what it is, to see the world it is a part of and the natural forces around it - as a part of what makes up that specific ecosystem. Arnheim is explaining how it is important to understand that this is coming from a more simple and spontaneous reactions, such as from children. The human being, on any level of mental and cultural development should preserve ‘an attitude which refuses to reserve the capacity of synthesis to the higher faculties of the human mind, but emphasizes the formative powers and, if I may say so, the “intelligence” of the peripheral sensory process, vision, hearing, touch, etc., which had been reduced by traditional theory of the task of carrying the bricks of experience to the architect in the inner sanctuary of mind’ (Arnheim 1943, p 71). What Arnheim is saying here is that the original reaction, the spontaneous mind where you haven't had the chance to analyze or study the picture, is the precious response of understanding gestalt theory. The importance of gestalt theory is not to formulate it scientifically, rather to experience it before you have the chance to try to make sense of it. Interestingly enough, the science behind it has to be from a more creative artistic mind and not a pure scientist for this to evolve.

“Blindness” (as opposed to such insight) is one of the favorite terms of the gestalt vocabulary”(Arnheim 1943, p72). What Arnheim is saying is that if we look at perception through how the eyes respond, with the millions of sensations produced within the retinae, there is a big issue explaining how we perceive. In such a way of looking at it one would think that the simpler mind would be more likely to draw more accurately, in terms of shapes and reality. The more developed mind would be the ones to transform and create more elaborate drawings further from reality. ‘A more adequate approach is possible if we understand that the content of perception is not identical with the sum of qualities corresponding to the projective picture. Rather it seems that productive perception - in the sense of an activity which allows to understand, identify, remember, and recognize things - is grasping of basic structural features, which characterize things and distinguish them from others’ (Arnheim 1943, p.73). Perception is more of an activity which makes us look at basic structures which then allows us to identify what we are looking at and interpret the shapes we see based on previous experiences within the perception phase. Arnheim is explaining how Gestalt theory is not affected by the receiving mind but rather sees shapes as a quality of nature in general. That the active perception sees both organic and inorganic shapes - suggesting that there is an organization phase happening within the retinae that do justice to the physical world. Comparing forces like this to a drop of oil in water, mechanical forces starts to push and pull, ending up as a perfect circle. This balance is not created for its beauty but is merely an organization phase based on the forces under those circumstances. The same is happening when the eye is stimulated by different amplitude and wavelengths of light, forces are pushing and pulling, creating shapes, colors, contours and creates an organized balance. ‘The discovery of this elementary relationship between perception and balance should be welcome to the theory of art’ (Arnheim 1943, p 73). Balance was usually added by an artist although why he/she did so was not always so clear. Arnheim is stating that balance creates pleasure, and that artist use balance to create a more aesthetically pleasurable image - which again points to that pleasure is because of balance. From this perspective you need to understand that pleasure and balance are two components working together, pleasure must not be seen as a product of balance.

One application of Gestalt theory is through expression. Here Arnheim is bringing up the fact that past experiences and logical conclusions are not necessary to understand normal facial or body expressions in general, based on Wertheimer. Expression is purely an understanding of shape, such as the difference between a straight line and a curve. If we see a dance performance which is expressing sadness, we do not understand sadness because we have seen sad people move in that way - but we see the geometry and shapes presented to us. Ultimately, expression within art should not be based on what we think we know about the human body is terms of expression, rather use the expressive qualities of shapes and apply them to any subject matter. Arnheim is saying that this theory is not against Gestalt theory but in favor for it. After reading Arnheim’s text on Gestalt and Art I am having some issues as to how he is trying to explain it. In certain examples he is discussing how less-developed minds such as children and more-developed minds with an adult, he is comparing how the two would potentially draw anything from a circle to a realistic image. My concern here is that these are two different aspects of the human brain working. As Arnheim is saying that Gestalt theory is based on perception and that initial response before it reaches the mind. Drawing on the other hand is a more technical task which requires practice and has little to do with that response. Surly enough we draw what we see, but it is not the seeing that makes for a good drawing. Now that we have unraveled the theory of Gestalt and hopefully gotten a better understanding of it, I want to explore how Arnheim's explanation relates to Affect. One of the most initial comparisons between Arnheim's article and Shouse’ paper is the fact that both use the example of the less developed mind, such as an infant/child. Although, before we discuss the similarities between the two I want to shortly look at Shouse's paper on affect.

Affect is often confused with feelings and emotions - although, it is highly based on the stages of your development. Affect comes first, it is that initial response before you have the chance to think it through, then comes feeling. Feeling is only possible when you have language skills and biographical experience, therefore feeling is not possible for an infant. An infant is experiencing affect, that response is often confused with feelings amongst adults. Although, the infant is able to express affect through emotions by facial expressions, color, respiration, and vocalisation. Both affect and gestalt theory is based on the same principle of development of your brain, it is the process which is not explainable by language. It's important to see that affect and gestalt are not based on previous experience but rather as a natural response to seeing and reacting. “Without affect feelings do not “feel” because they have no intensity, and without feelings rational decision-making becomes problematic (Damasio 204-22). In short, affect plays an important role in determining the relationship between our bodies, our environment, and others, and the subjective experience that we feel/think as affect dissolves into experience.” (Shouse, 2005)

The simplest way of understanding this process would be to put it in a timeline, gestalt happens first which is turned into affect, then that affect either becomes a feeling or emotion based on your ability to have feelings.

Bibliography Arnheim, R (1943) Gestalt and Art p 71-75 Eric Shouse, “Feeling, Emotion, Affect”, MC Journal, Vol. 8, No. 6 (December 2005), http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0512/03-shouse.php