Psychological Aesthetics: Painting, Feeling and Making Sense

158 Pages·2001·0.47 MB·English

by  David MacLagan

Psychological Aesthetics

Psychological Aesthetics
Painting, Feeling and Making Sense
David Maclagan
Jessica Kingsley Publishers
London and Philadelphia
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproducedinanymaterialform
(includingphotocopyingorstoringitinanymediumbyelectronicmeansandwhetheror
nottransientlyorincidentallytosomeotheruseofthispublication)withoutthewritten
permissionofthecopyrightownerexceptinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthe
Copyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988orunderthetermsofalicenceissuedbythe
CopyrightLicensingAgencyLtd,90TottenhamCourtRoad,London,EnglandW1T4LP.
Applicationsforthecopyrightowner’swrittenpermissiontoreproduceanypartofthis
publicationshouldbeaddressedtothepublisher.
Warning:Thedoingofanunauthorisedactinrelationtoacopyrightworkmayresultin
bothacivilclaimfordamagesandcriminalprosecution.
TherightofDavidMaclagantobeidentifiedasauthorofthisworkhasbeenassertedby
himinaccordancewiththeCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.
FirstpublishedintheUnitedKingdomin2001by
JessicaKingsleyPublishers
116PentonvilleRoad
LondonN19JB,UK
and
400MarketStreet,Suite400
Philadelphia,PA19106,USA
www.jkp.com
Copyright©2001DavidMaclagan
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
ACIPcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheLibraryofCongress
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Maclagan,David
Psychologicalaesthetics:painting,feelingandmakingsense
1.Aesthetics2.Arttherapy3.Psychoanalysisandart
I.Title
616.8’91656
ISBN1853028347
ISBN-13:9781853028342
ISBN-10:1853028347
PrintedandBoundinGreatBritainby
AthenaeumPress,Gateshead,TyneandWear
Contents
Acknowledgements 6
Introduction 7
ChapterOne: TheRiseandFallof theAesthetic 17
ChapterTwo: TheSplitbetweenInnerandOuter
WorldsandtheImpoverishmentof
PsychologicalLife 33
ChapterThree: FromIconographytoEmbodiment 47
ChapterFour: FromInarticulatetoAestheticForm 61
ChapterFive: Aesthetics,BeautyandSoul 71
ChapterSix: ArtTherapyandtheTherapyof Art 81
ChapterSeven: TowardsaNewPsychologicalAesthetics 99
ChapterEight: PuttingAestheticandPsychological
QualitiesintoWords 111
Conclusion 129
References 145
SubjectIndex 151
NameIndex 155
Acknowledgements
Insomewaysthisbookhasbeenwrittenfromapositionof isolation;notjustin
termsofhavingtoredefinewhatmightbemeantby‘aesthetic’and‘psychological’
againstthegrainofcurrentpreconceptions,butalsointhesensethattheconstitu-
encyIamappealingtoseemsasyetbarelyvisible.Icaughtglimpsesofitinthework
oftheLondonConviviumforArchetypalStudies,begunbyNoelCobbandthelate
Eva Loewe, with its passionate insistence on the links between art, beauty and
soul-making;butsometimesthisfelttooelegant,toowellcomposed.IknewthatI
was looking for something else; something inarticulate and anarchic that also
refusedtheall-embracingedictsofpsychoanalysis.Thebenefitofthisisperhapsa
degreeofindependencefromanyparticularschoolofthought;thedrawback,that
someofmyownideasmayseemabittoospeculativeorunformed.
However, a glance at the contents will show that certain writers have been
sourcesofexcitementandchallengetome:AntonEhrenzweig,JamesHillman(in
personaswellasonthepage),Jean-FrançoisLyotardandMauriceMerleau-Ponty.I
wouldalsoliketosalutearecentlyrecognisedkindredspirit,JamesElkins.
MuchofthematerialinthisbookderivesfromteachingtheMAinArtandPsy-
chotherapyattheCentreforPsychotherapeuticStudies,UniversityofSheffield.Iam
grateful to John Henzell, my collaborator on this course, and above all to the
students who over half a dozen years encouraged me and helped me further my
thinkingbeforethecoursewascloseddown.IalsooweadebttoLinneyWixandthe
arttherapystudentsattheUniversityofNewMexico,whoinvitedmeovertotalk
aboutpsychologicalaestheticsin1996.Ihavealsolearnedagreatdealfromthe
patients I worked with earlier as an art therapist in Broomhills therapeutic
community.
Other friends and colleagues who have encouraged me or helped me in my
thinking, sometimes without knowing it, include: Iain Biggs, Neil Bolton, Peter
Byrne,RogerCardinal,ClaytonEshleman,AngelaHeskett,SeanHomer,Howard
McGoneghy,MichaelEdwards,MichaelGinsborg,SimonLewty,StephenNewton,
Michael Podro, Genviève Roulin, Rita Simon and Michel Thévoz. Clayton
EshlemanandGregoryCorsoalsoneedtobethankedfortheirkindpermissionto
reproducetheircopyrightmaterial.
Last,butmostimportantofall,IwouldliketoacknowledgehowmuchIhave
beenformedandnourishedbytheexperienceofpainting,bothasanartistinmy
ownstudio,asaworkshopleaderandasavisitortoallkindsofmuseums,galleries,
exhibitionsandstudios.Inaveryrealsensepaintinghaskeptmealive.
The publishers acknowledge permission to quote from the following copyright
source:
‘TheCircleofStyles’,byRitaSimon,reproducedonp.94,fromTheSymbolism
ofStyle:ArtasTherapy(Routledge,1992).Reproducedbykindpermissionof
theAuthorandRoutledge,London.
6
Introduction
What does ‘psychological aesthetics’ mean? Although the term may be
unfamiliar, it refers to the relation between the actual (aesthetic) qualities of
painting,suchasline,colour,handling,compositionandsoonandtheinner
(psychological)effectsthatthesehaveonthespectator.‘Aesthetic’inthissense
isgroundedinthematerialpropertiesofpainting,ratherthanreferringtosome
disembodiedrealmofjudgementsaboutbeautyortruth.‘Psychological’also
refers to a somewhat different range of experience from the traditional
psychologyofperception.Hereitsuggeststhecomplexandshiftingarrayof
sensations, feelings, fantasies, thoughts and other less easily categorisable
eventsofmentallifethataccompanyallourperceptions,whetherweareaware
ofthemornot.Thisissomethingthatcouldbecalledthe‘psychologicallining
of experience’.
Suchreverberationsareinevidencewhereverartreproducessomelifeevent
or situation of human interest, most obviously in the narratives of literature,
dramaorfilm.Butitisalsopresenteveninpassagesofapparentlyinertdescrip-
tion, and this is especially true for painting. Certain landscapes or still lives,
even though they seem to have the same immediacy and transparency as
language,stillofferasourceofpleasureinthevisualillusiontheyprovide.Even
themostfactualorimpassiveofsuchrepresentationsstillcarriesapsycholog-
ical lining: the scrupulous, glassy neutrality of a Saenredam interior or a
Canalettoview,forexample,conveysacertaincooldetachmentand‘objectiv-
ity’whichhasitsownpsychologicalnuances.
Hence, no matter how realistic a painting is or how impressive its sub-
ject-matter,itisneversimplyasouvenirorrecreationoftheoriginalmoments
whenthispsychologicalliningofexperiencewasfelt:ittranslatesandintensi-
fiestheminitsownparticularways.Thesedependcruciallyontheaesthetic
qualitiesofpaintingmentionedabove.Forexample,VanGoghwroteinaletter
abouttheskyofhis‘Sower’(1888)asfollows:‘Theskychromeyellow,almost
asbrightasthesunitself,whichischromeyellow1withalittlewhite,while
therestoftheskyischromeyellow1and2mixed.Thusveryyellow.’Inthe
sameletterhegoesontosay:‘Therearemanytouchesof yellowinthesoil,
7
8 / PSYCHOLOGICALAESTHETICS
neutraltonesproducedbymixingpurplewiththeyellow,butIcouldn’tcare
lesswhatthecoloursareinreality’(quotedGayfordandWright1999,p.380).
The psychological lining of experience is not only altered by its material
translation into paint: the actual aesthetic features of a painting – such as its
pressure of line, density of colour, coherence or incoherence of form – have
theirownindependentpsychologicalcontributiontomake.
Psychologicalaestheticsisthefieldinwhichwhatwestudyaretheinterac-
tionsbetweenpaintingatthelevelof‘facture’(handling)andthe‘feeling’or
makingsensethatitpromptsinus.However,thisinteractionisnotassimpleas
itissometimesmadeouttobe:thetrafficbetweenapaintingandthespectator
isnotone-way.Conventionalassumptionsaboutcommunicationorexpression
inartassumethatapaintingtransmitsanalreadyestablishedmessagetousand
thatweregisterthismoreorlesssuccessfully.Butperceptionalwaysinvolvesa
complexinteractionbetweenviewersandwhatthey‘see’,andourexperience
ofpaintingsenhancessuchreactions.Infactpaintingscanbesaidtofunction
as‘condensers’of suchinteractions.
A still-life by Bonnard, for example, can play them back to us in slow
motionbyinviting(orsometimesforcing)ustotryandaccommodatethedis-
crepanciesbetweenthefamiliarityofitssubjectandtheactualpassagesofpaint
thatrefusetocorrespondinastraightforwardwaytoitsdetails.Thisillegibility
may only appear on closer inspection, when we begin to notice all kinds of
crazylocaladventuresinBonnard’suseoflineandcolour.Tosomeextentthese
echo,orevoke,acorrespondinglydeliciousuncertaintyaboutourperception
of equivalentscenesinreallife.
Even in the case of more comfortably representational works, there is an
alternation between ‘seeing through’ a painting, to what it represents, and
making the painting itself the focus of our attention.1 Painting that draws
attention to its ‘facture’ or material handling, dramatises its aesthetic effects,
andcertainkindsofabstractpainting,suchasAbstractExpressionism,might
be said to do this exclusively. These exchanges between spectators and the
painting they are feeling their way into often take place at a largely uncon-
scious level: we may register various effects without being aware of how we
cametoexperiencethem.Thissubliminaldimensionofaestheticexperienceis
somethinglargerandmorediffusethanwhatisusuallyunderstoodby‘uncon-
scious’initspsychoanalyticsense(asweshallseeinChapterTwo).Totryto
explorethisdomain,totuneintoitscomplexitiesandtograpplewiththediffi-
culties of ‘making sense’, is to be engaged in what I shall call the ‘creative
reception’ofpainting,asopposedtoamorepassiveassimilationorenjoyment
ofit.2Itshouldbeclearbynowwhysuchcreativereceptionhastobeintimately
involvedwithpsychologicalaesthetics.
INTRODUCTION / 9
Mentionoftheword‘aesthetic’conjuresup,however,allsortsofprejudices
andresistancesandtapsintoawidespreadsuspicionof theterm.Itisaword
that has acquired notoriously abstract and sophisticated connotations; it is
associated with philosophical or critical debates that often seem rarified or
pedantic.Inthehistoryofaesthetics,fromPlatoonward,thevalueandpurpose
ofartdependeduponitsrelationtobeautyandtotruth.Thisrelationwasoften
problematic:theverysortsofaestheticqualitiesuponwhichIshallbeconcen-
tratinginthisbookweresuspectpreciselyonaccountof theircloseinvolve-
mentwithmatterandthesenses.
Tomakemattersmoredifficult,beautyitselfhas,inthehistoryofartsince
the Renaissance, been progressively re-visioned. There has been an increas-
ingly contradictory relationship between conventional norms of beauty and
worksofartthatseektochallengeorrefusethem.InMannerism,forexample,
establishedstylesofrepresentationandexpressionweredeliberatelydistorted
orexaggerated.
By the mid-nineteenth century notions of beauty in art were effectively
dividedbetweenacademicandsentimentalstereotypesandamoreoriginalor
avant-gardeartinwhichadegreeofstrangenessorevenshockwasanecessary
ingredientfortruebeauty.Thehistoryoftheword‘bizarre’isinstructivewith
regardtothis.IntheearlyRenaissance‘bizarre’wasassociatedwithsenseless
madness;lateritcametodenotetheeccentric,andeventuallyitbecameaquint-
essential sign of creativity. By the 1850s it had acquired a crucial aesthetic
status.Baudelaire,forexample,claimedthat:
The beautiful is always bizarre.[…] Now how could this bizarreness –
necessary, irreducible, infinitely varied, and determined by milieu, climate,
custom,race,religionandtheartist’stemperament–everbecontrolledbythe
Utopianrulesthatareconceivedinsomeordinarylittlescientifictempleon
thisplanet,withoutmortaldangertoartitself?(quotedGilman1988,p.241)
It is only a few steps from this cult of the bizarre to more extreme or even
perverseformsof beautywhichareboundtohavepathologicalundertones.
The‘aesthetic’effectsofarthaveineffectcometobeincreasinglyseparable
fromanymoralpurposetheymightbesupposedtohave.Instead,theseeffects
canbesaidtobelongtoarealmwhichisasmuchoneof‘feeling’,inbothits
emotionalanditssensuousforms,asoftruthorpropriety.Thisnewterritoryof
aestheticexperiencetouchesonstrangeandextremeformsofhumanpsycho-
logicalexperience,oftenoutsidethenorm.
Indeed,inthemoreprovocativeformsofso-called‘decadent’artitseemsas
ifartistsaredeliberatelyfloutingtheconventionsthatlinkaestheticattraction
and moral effect (a recent, equally deliberate, reversal of this can be seen in