Combining universal beauty and cultural context in a unifying model of visual aesthetic experience

Abstract

In this work, I propose a model of visual aesthetic experience that combines formalist and contextual aspects of aesthetics. The model distinguishes between two modes of processing. First, perceptual processing is based on the intrinsic form of an artwork, which may or may not be beautiful. If it is beautiful, a beauty-responsive mechanism is activated in the brain. This bottom–up mechanism is universal amongst humans; it is widespread in the visual brain and responsive across visual modalities. Second, cognitive processing is based on contextual information, such as the depicted content, the intentions of the artist or the circumstances of the presentation of the artwork. Cognitive processing is partially top–down and varies between individuals according to their cultural experience. Processing in the two channels is parallel and largely independent. In the general case, an aesthetic experience is induced if processing in both channels is favorable, i.e., if there is resonance in the perceptual processing channel (“aesthetics of perception”), and successful mastering in the cognitive processing channel (“aesthetics of cognition”). I speculate that this combinatorial mechanism has evolved to mediate social bonding between members of a (cultural) group of people. Primary emotions can be elicited via both channels and modulate the degree of the aesthetic experience. Two special cases are discussed. First, in a subset of (post-)modern art, beauty no longer plays a prominent role. Second, in some forms of abstract art, beautiful form can be enjoyed with minimal cognitive processing. The model is applied to examples of Western art. Finally, implications of the model are discussed. In summary, the proposed model resolves the seeming contradiction between formalist perceptual approaches to aesthetic experience, which are based on the intrinsic beauty of artworks, and contextual approaches, which account for highly individual and culturally dependent aspects of aesthetics.

Berlyne Revisited: Evidence for the Multifaceted Nature of Hedonic Tone in the Appreciation of Paintings and Music

“…Fluency theory (Reber et al, 2004; Reber, 2012), which posits that the ease of processing determines preference, may also explain the underlying mechanism of the mere exposure effect and the prototype-preference theory, but it does not offer a clear account for Berlyne’s arousal theory (Palmer et al, 2013). Lately, the field has witnessed the emergence of several multicomponent models (Leder et al, 2004; Hagtvedt et al, 2008; Marković, 2012; Shimamura, 2012; Tinio, 2013; Chatterjee and Vartanian, 2014; Leder and Nadal, 2014; Redies, 2015; Pelowski et al, 2016), which aim to describe the essence of esthetic experiences by modeling the relationship between bottom–up and top–down processes as well as their underlying causes and neural substrates. Here, we follow this approach with a strong emphasis on Berlyne’s theory.…”

Global Sensory Qualities and Aesthetic Experience in Music

“…Early processing of visual information is predominantly local, as each local point in an image is projected tonotopically to a point in a visual representation (Wurtz and Kandel, 2000). As the information processing continues, however, the local features are integrated into a whole percept, or Gestalt, that “puts each pictorial element in perceptual relation to the other elements in the artwork” (Redies, 2015, p. 6) and thus integrates the various local elements together. It is that whole Gestalt that, according to many vision researchers, is relevant to the appreciation of beauty (Ramachandran and Hirstein, 1999; Zeki, 1999).…”

“…It is that whole Gestalt that, according to many vision researchers, is relevant to the appreciation of beauty (Ramachandran and Hirstein, 1999; Zeki, 1999). Thus, the “Global structure refers to statistical regularities in large parts of the image or in the entire image, for example the spatial frequency content of the image, the kurtosis of its luminance values, overall complexity of self-similarity” (Redies, 2015, p. 4). Hence, it is not generally possible to take a piece of art, break it into pieces and then reassemble it back in random order while automatically preserving its artistic qualities.…”

“…Spehar et al (2015) reached similar conclusions by correlating visual sensitivity with the aesthetic properties of visual random patters. Other candidates for global sensory properties that have been studied recently include processing fluency (Reber et al, 2004; Babel and McGuire, 2015; Forster et al, 2015), distribution of spectral frequency power (Menzel et al, 2015), self-similarity and fractal properties (Taylor et al, 1999, 2011; Spehar et al, 2003; Hagerhall et al, 2004; Mureika et al, 2004; Graham and Field, 2007; Redies, 2007, 2015; Forsythe et al, 2011; Mallon et al, 2014). …”

“…As pointed out by Redies (2015), the creation of visual beauty is not limited to any particular style, method, genre, or form, such as color, shape, luminance, texture, edges, or depth cues. A wide variety of materials can be used to create visually appealing objects.…”