Sunday, September 28, 2008

"Why Should Artists Strive For Balance?"

I was most interested in Arnheim's discussion of balance and the human mind. As human's we strive for balance. Human's want to place the subject in time and space. We seek organization. Arnheim comments that in order for an artist's statement within a work to be "unambiguous," the artist must strive to balance and stabilize the various visual forces that are present in the work. An artist must present something balanced in order for in to be perceived properly? Balance is desired in all aspects of life; physical balance and mental balance. "Balance remains the final goal of any wish to be fulfilled, any task to be accomplished, any problem to be solved."(Arnheim, 37) Stress or tension is placed on the system when things are not at balance. This is an interesting way to think about the idea of balance in art. In relation to Freud's "pleasure principal," when one is presented with something unpleasant or the thought/memory of something unpleasant one will do whatever necessary to alleviate that discomfort or tension. Similarly, when looking a piece of art human's will do all that they can to organize the visual information that they are receiving. Both the artist; in making the work and the viewer of the work are participating in attempt to reduce tension, organize, and find equilibrium. Is the universe's desired state a stabilized one? Why would humans strive as they do to equalize things if that were the case? Arnheim says, we are "waging an uphill battle against the universal law of entropy." Why do we strive as we do? Why is balance so important to us? I once read somewhere that the most symmetrical faces are considered to be the most beautiful, but I suppose that that could lead to a whole other discussion on aesthetics and perception of beauty. 
Something in the reading that also stuck out for me was the discussion about the visual experience and it's relationship to the physiological. Each visual stimuli has its own "physiological counterpart." In order to have the full visual experience there must be an interaction between all the parts of the visual system. There are different forces at work as well. How does the viewer perceive these forces; pushes and pulls? They are inherent in the visual patterns of the object being perceived. 
I enjoyed the discussion of "Madame Cezanne in a Yellow Chair." Perception is highly affected by use of light, color and the subject's focus.  Each aspect of the painting could be unbalanced individually, but all together they give the painting a balanced structure. 

6 comments:

Jessica Ziskind said...

I was also drawn to Arnheim’s dialogue about balance and the central role it plays in art. How we as viewers initially perceive and formulate opinions of a particular artwork is rooted in its aesthetic appearance. Usually, if a work is lopsided or asymmetrical our first instinct is to want to look away or as Cavin said, “do whatever necessary to alleviate that discomfort or tension.” Last week I used my favorite painting entitled “Christina’s World” by Andrew Wyeth to illustrate a point about equaluminance, however, the theme of balance or in this case, lack of balance is also worth mentioning. (http://www.uen.org/utahlink/tours/admin/tour/17720/17720World.jpg) The focal point of the painting depicts a young woman named Christina who was paralyzed from the waist down due to muscular complications. Shape comes in to play as well because her contorted and crooked physique startles the eye, as it is not something we see on an everyday basis. Moreover, the off center positioning of the farmhouse in the background is disagreeable and awkward to the viewer once again. Yet it is in this skewed sense of balance that I became fascinated by this painting. In my mind, Wyeth was taking a risk by arranging the figures in this atypical way and was going against the status quo of equilibrium that was usually found in the great works of art of the past.

The topic of facial symmetry and its relation to beauty was also an interesting topic that was raised. I have a unique, oval/long bone structure to my face that I always perceived to be much different from the average person. When I was a pre-teen it was a point of insecurity for me because it was unlike the rounder and fuller faces I saw in magazines and advertisements that portrayed what I believed to be idyllic beauty. While I no longer think about this anymore because I have grown to accept and be fond of my face shape I still wonder if it is the more symmetrical faces that are looked at as attractive or if that is simply a myth.

lily said...

I was also really interested in the role that conflict plays in Arnheim’s discussion of balance, from an aesthetic and psychological point of view. Arnheim mentions the role of conflict in perception, psychoanalytic theory and physics. It is fascinating that the interaction between balance and what Arnheim calls the energetic or activating life force is so compelling in art. One of the basic things that you learn in some theater practices is to establish the conflict between the character’s motivations. It would be interesting to think about how artists utilize conflict in different media- literature, dance, theater- and how artists may attempt to eschew this tension form their work.
Arnheim writes frequently about how ideas of balance and symmetry are based on the body. One great example is how architecture plays upon the “muscle sensations in their bodies.” He writes about how we incorporate the sensory experiences of weight and gravity and perhaps, the biological advantage of symmetry, into perceptual and artistic endeavors. Livingstone really shows how perception is based on the physiological structure of our eyes. Arnheim, here, shows how aesthetic perception may be connected to our psychological mapping of our own bodies. Infants are drawn to human faces, presumably, because their development is based on social interaction. Perhaps there are other evolutionary reasons for our attraction to symmetry or to structures that mimic the human form.

Kristen Gull said...

"Why is balance so important to us? I once read somewhere that the most symmetrical faces are considered to be the most beautiful, but I suppose that that could lead to a whole other discussion on aesthetics and perception of beauty."

My first-year studies last year was an art history class and we studied a lot about what various philosophers and art critics had to say about what is or isn't "beautiful." I do believe that balance is important in creating a pleasing visual image, but at the same time, the beauty of a piece of art may be its asymmetry.

The reason I think this is because of the concept of a "beauty mark." Marilyn Monroe has one of the most famous and arguably beautiful faces, but she has an asymmetry to her. However, it is her trademark and some people even get piercings to imitate her famous mark.

Similarly, like Jessica's example of "Christina's World," the beauty of an piece of art that can set it apart from all others can be its asymmetry.

tarren said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tarren said...

When I paint, one of the most crucial parts for me is when I turn the canvas upside down and study the basic shapes and movement of the painting. On p.34 (Figure 16) Arnheim demonstrates how and why the brain responds to visual weight.
Painting also showed me how to make a better portrait by simplifying the face into a series of shapes, creating what Arnhiem calls the "structural skeleton." By organizing the facial features as shapes, my portraits are more accurate. I also found Arnheim's mention of personal experience and visual perception interesting. I was well aware of olfactory senses, but I never considered the influence of memory on visual perception.

Sonia said...
This comment has been removed by the author.