Aesthetic Effect of Old Master Paintings Measured by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
The University College of London recently undertook an experiment where subjects were given brain scans while they viewed a 10-second interval progression of projected images of paintings by Old Masters such as Constable, Bosch and Ingres.
The results showed that blood flow to the medial orbitofrontal cortex, the part of the brain associated with pleasure and desire, increased by ten percent — a reaction similar to falling in love.
The subjects of the experiment were chosen for their lack of arts education and exposure so that their responses would be similarly unschooled and unaffected by current fashion or critical discourse. There was no variation in response between images of landscapes, portraits, still life paintings, or abstract works. Paintings which were considered more aesthetically challenging, however — images by artists such as Bosch, Damier or Massys, in which the cerebral message of the work overruled the sensual content or the beauty of its visual presentation — generated less of a response which signified pleasure.
The scientist who oversaw this experiment was Professor Semir Zeki, chair of Neuroaesthetics at the University College of London. The experiment is up for peer review and is expected to be published in a scientific journal.
This story was originally reported by Robert Mendick, a senior staff reporter at The Telegraph, London, England, on 08 May, 2011, who also took the opportunity to interview such expert art educators such as Dr Stephen Deuchar, director of the Art Fund, a philanthropic group which purchases works for museums and public exhibition venues, with an eye to the effects of funding cuts to various arts programs by the current Conservative government in Britain.
In the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, similar funding cuts are at issue, and studies like these may help to generate sympathy for continued support of public arts financing.
In Calgary, concerned parents and students have formed the organization Save Our Fine Arts (SOFA) in order to deal with the issue of consistent funding to fine arts education in the public education system. The question is whether studies like this will help to garner increased support from parents who Hon. Dave Hancock, MLA Education, has emphasized are the ones who must lobby for allocation of resources toward fine arts in the Public and Catholic school systems.
The problem with the study is that it is so limited in its scope, in that it used the works of only thirty painters. Also, the mandate of fine arts has expanded far beyond the requirement that it be of aesthetic pleasure to the beholder. Since the advent of Modernism, beauty can stand in a place of secondary relevance to a work’s value and may not factor into the appreciation of the work at all. Artists such as Marcel Duchamp, Jean-Claude Riopelle, John Cage and Francis Bacon have challenged the notion of what constitutes a work of art and what constitutes beauty, so that now, in the Postmodern/Contemporary era, a work can be entirely conceptual or ephemeral.
Zeki’s study confirms what arts educators have always known, that beautiful images generate pleasure and a sense of well being. The study could have gone so much further. It would’ve been interesting to evaluate the results from expanding the experiment in these ways:
- Using artists, themselves, as well as those who work in related fields such as art criticism, art education and art therapy.
- Utilizing works from the Modern, Postmodern and Contemporary fields of art in which aesthetic response is not the primary consideration — for example, Nicole Dextras’ Ice Typography.
- Providing straightforward point-and-shoot photographs of scenes similar to those depicted in the paintings as a contrast to the actual work of art; ie., is it the aesthetic beauty of the image which provides the heightened response, or the artistry?
It would be especially interesting to see if there is a similar physiological response when people have taken the time to educate themselves in art, or if the effects are more subtle.
— 30 —
Crossposted to CalgaryVisualArts.com
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
21 November, 2011 at 10:48 pm
tokyobling
Perhaps modern art (Picasso, Mondrian etc.) would generate a similar response but not necessarily those related to love. I often feel physically ill when looking at modernist or modern art, especially abstract, cubist or most post-Duchamp art. I am a trained art critic but my reaction has not changed over the years (needless to say I do not earn my living in the art world anymore – it would be unfeasible).
Possibly training can help bring about enjoyment of “unsightly” art but one would need to answer the burning question of why spend the time and effort on training someone to enjoy ugly art? Is it just an intellectual exercise?
The same goes for architecture, dance and fashion I assume. After all, a lot of modern architectural training is all about indoctrinating students in the economically feasible designs of the present (i.e. concrete, some more concrete, topped with a bit of what is essentially 3D cubist concrete). Music is probably far to primeval to be easily measured.
22 November, 2011 at 8:28 am
Simone
Welcome, Tokyobling. I’ve certainly experienced Stendahl Syndrome before, both in nature and various galleries. My response wasn’t as dramatic as Henri-Marie Beyle, in that I didn’t faint, but I certainly experienced heart palpitations, an accelerated pulse and the sensation of bliss that is akin to spiritual meditation. I was gratified to learn from this experiment that the condition is physiological, not psychosomatic.
A psychosomatic condition asserts that our responses to things are a matter of personal taste, and therefore under our ‘mental control.’ This proves exactly the opposite. We can’t help but respond positively to beauty.
Critical theory allows us to expand our definition of art, and we can have all kinds of responses to art, including being enraged or disgusted or shocked, but our response to beauty remains static. It affects us physically, and in a positive manner.