Aesthetical values of photography and Arnheim's psychology of art

Introduction

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.

Visual Thinking--The Highest Sense

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 be 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). *

Theoretical Thinking

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).

Visual Dynamic

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.