Various - Harvard Psychological Studies, Volume 1

V >> Various >> Harvard Psychological Studies, Volume 1

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55

[7] Cushing, F.H.: _op. cit._; Holmes, W.H.: three articles on
pottery, Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol., 1882-83, p. 265, p. 367, and
p. 443.

[Illustration: Fig. 2]

[Illustration: Fig. 3]

[Illustration: Fig. 4]

The subject of drawing can be here only touched upon, but the results
of study go to show, in general, two main directions of primitive
expression: pictorial representation, aiming at truth of life, and
symbolic ornament. The drawings of Australians, Hottentots and
Bushmen, and the carvings of the Esquimaux and of the prehistoric men
of the reindeer period show remarkable vigor and naturalness; while
the ornamentation of such tribes as the South Sea Islanders has a
richness and formal beauty that compare favorably with the decoration
of civilized contemporaries. But these two types of art do not always
keep pace with each other. The petroglyphs of the North American
Indians[8] exhibit the greatest irregularity, while their tattooing is
extremely regular and symmetrical. The Brazilian savage [9] draws
freehand in a very lively and grotesque manner, but his patterns are
regular and carefully developed. Again, not all have artistic talents
in the same direction. Dr. Schurtz, in his 'Ornamentik der Aino,'[10]
says: "There are people who show a decided impulse for the direct
imitation of nature, and especially for the representation of events
of daily life, as dancing, hunting, fishing, etc. It is, however,
remarkable that a real system of ornamentation is scarcely ever
developed from pictorial representations of this kind; that, in fact,
the people who carry out these copies of everyday scenes with especial
preference, are in general less given to covering their utensils with
a rich ornamentive decoration."[11] Drawing and ornament, as the
products of different tendencies, may therefore be considered
separately.

[8] Mallery, Garrick: 'Pictographs of the North American
Indians,' Rep. of Bur. of Ethnol., 1882-3, p. 13.

[9] Von den Steinen, Karl: 'Unter den Naturvolkern
Zentral-Brasiliens,' Berlin, 1894.

[10] _Internal. Archiv s. Ethnog._, Bd. IX.

[11] Cf. Andree, Richard: 'Ethnographische Parallelen,' Neue
Folge, Leipzig, 1889, S. 59.

The reason for the divergence of drawing and ornament is doubtless the
original motive of ornamentation, which is found in the clan or totem
ideas. Either to invoke protection or to mark ownership, the totem
symbol appears on all instruments and utensils; it has been shown,
indeed, that practically all primitive ornament is based on totemic
motives.[12] Now, since a very slight suggestion of the totem given by
its recognized symbol is sufficient for the initiated, the extreme of
conventionalization and degradation of patterns is allowable, and is
observed to take place. The important point to be noted in this
connection is, however, that all these changes are toward symmetry.
The most striking examples might be indefinitely multiplied, and are
to be found in the appended references (see Figs. 8 and 9).

[12] Haddon, _op. cit._; Frazer, J.G.: 'Totemism,' 1887;
Grosse, Ernst: Anfaenge der Kunst,' Freiburg i. B. u. Leipzig,
1894.

[Illustration: Fig. 5.]

[Illustration: Fig. 6.]

[Illustration: Fig. 7.]

We may distinguish here, also, between the gradual disintegration and
degradation of pattern toward symmetry, as seen in the examples just
given, and the deliberate distortion of figures for a special purpose.
This is strikingly shown in the decorative art of the Indians of the
North Pacific coast. They systematically represent their totem
animals--their only decorative motives--as split in symmetrical
sections, and opened out flat on the surface which is to be
covered[13] (see Fig. 11). Dr. Boas argues that their purpose is to
get in all the received symbols, or to show the whole animal, but,
however this may be, every variation introduces symmetry even where it
is difficult to do so, as in the case, for instance, of bracelets,
hat-brims, etc. (Fig. 10). This may in some cases be due to the
symmetrical suggestions of the human body in tattooing,[14] but it
must be so in comparatively few.

[13] Boas, Franz: 'Decorative Art of the Indians of the North Pacific
Coast,' _Bulletin_ of Am. Mus. of Nat. Hist., Vol. IX.

[14] Mallery, G.: _op. cit._; Haddon, A.C.: _op. cit._, p. 257;
'Decorative Art of British New Guinea,' Cunningham Memoir X., Royal
Irish Acad., 1894, p. 26.

[Illustration: Fig. 8.]

[Illustration: Fig. 9.]

[Illustration: Fig. 10]

The primitive picture has for its object not only to impart
information, but to excite the very definite pleasure of recognition
of a known object. All explorers agree in their accounts of the
savage's delight in his own naive efforts at picture making. All such
drawings show in varying degrees the same characteristics; first of
all, an entire lack of symmetry. In a really great number of examples,
including drawings and picture-writing from all over the world, I
have not found one which showed an attempt at symmetrical arrangement.
Secondly, great life and movement, particularly in the drawings of
animals. Thirdly, an emphasis of the typical characteristics, the
logical marks, amounting sometimes to caricature. The primitive man
draws to tell a story, as children do. He gives with real power what
interests him, and puts in what he knows ought to be there, even if it
is not seen, but he is so engrossed by his interest in the imitated
object as to neglect entirely its relation to a background.

[Illustration: FIG. 11]

Now, this very antithesis of ornament and picture is enlightening as
to the dawn of aesthetic feeling, and the strongest confirmation of our
hypothesis of an original impulse to symmetry in art. In the
ornamentation of objects the content or meaning of the design is
already supplied by the merest hint of the symbol which is the
practical motive of all ornamentation. The savage artist need,
therefore, concern himself no more about it, and the form of his
design is free to take whatever shape is demanded either by the
conditions of technique and the surface to be ornamented, or by the
natural aesthetic impulse. We have found that technical conditions
account for only a small part of the observed symmetry in pattern, and
the inference to a natural tendency to symmetry is clear. Pictorial
representation, on the other hand, is enjoyed by the primitive man
merely as an imitation, of which he can say, 'This is that animal'--to
paraphrase Aristotle's Poetics. He is thus constrained to reproduce
the form as it shows meaning, and to ignore it as form, or as his
natural motor impulses would make it.

To sum up the conclusions reached by this short survey of the field of
primitive art, it is clear that much of the symmetry appearing in
primitive art is due (1) to the conditions of construction, as in the
form of dwellings, binding-patterns, weaving and textile patterns
generally; (2) to convenience in use, as in the shapes of spears,
arrows, knives, two-handled baskets and jars; (3) to the imitation of
animal forms, as in the shapes of pottery, etc. On the other hand (1)
a very great deal of symmetrical ornament maintains itself _against_
the suggestions of the shape to which it is applied, as the ornaments
of baskets, pottery, and all rounded objects; and (2) all distortion,
disintegration, degradation of pattern-motives, often so marked as all
but to destroy their meaning, is in the direction of geometrical
symmetry. In short it is impossible to account for more than a small
part of the marked symmetry of primitive art by non-aesthetic
influences, and we are therefore forced to conclude an original
tendency to create symmetry, and to take pleasure in it. A strong
negative confirmation of this is given, as noted above, by the utter
lack of symmetry of the only branch of art in which the primitive man
is fully preoccupied with meaning to the neglect of shape; and by the
contrast of this with those branches of art in which attention to
meaning is at its minimum.

The question put at the beginning of this section must thus be
answered affirmatively. There is evidence of an original aesthetic
pleasure in symmetry.

III. EXPERIMENTS IN SUBSTITUTIONAL SYMMETRY.

_A. Method of Experiment._

A certain degree of original aesthetic pleasure in symmetry may be
considered to have been established by the preceding section, and,
without considering further the problems of real or geometrical
symmetry, it may now be asked whether the pleasure aroused by the form
of asymmetrical objects is not at bottom also pleasure in symmetry;
whether, in other words, a kind of substitution of factors does not
obtain in such objects, which brings about a psychological state
similar to that produced by real symmetry.

The question what these substituted factors may be can perhaps be
approached by a glance at a few pictures which are accepted as
beautiful in form, although not geometrically symmetrical. Let us
take, for instance, several simple pictures from among the well-known
altar-pieces, all representing the same subject, the _Madonna
Enthroned_ with _Infant Christ_, and all of generally symmetrical
outline. It seems, then, reasonable to assume that if the variations
from symmetry show constantly recurring tendencies, they represent the
chief factors in such a substitutional symmetry or balance, supposing
it to exist. The following pictures are thus treated in detail, M.
denoting Madonna; C., Child; and Cn., Central Line. The numbers refer
to the collection of reproductions used exclusively in this
investigation, and further described in section IV.

1. 56, Martin Schoengauer: _Madonna in Rose-arbor._ M. is seated
exactly in Cn., C. on Right, turning to Right. M. turns to Left, and
her long hair and draperies form one long unbroken line down to Left
lower corner. All other details symmetrical.

2. 867, Titian: _Madonna_. The picture is wider than it is high. M.
stands slightly to Right of Cn.; C. on Right. Both turn slightly to
Left, and the drapery of M. makes a long sweep to Left. Also a deep
perspective occupies the whole Left field.

3. 248, Raphael: _Madonna_ (The Bridgewater Madonna). M. sits in Cn.,
turning to Left; C. lies across her lap, head to Left, but his face
turned up to Right, and all the lines of his body tending sharply down
to Right.

In 1, all the elements of the picture are symmetrical except the
position of C. on the Right, and the long flowing line to Left. In 2,
there is a slightly greater variation. The mass of the figures is to
Right, and the C. entirely over against the deep perspective and the
flowing line on the Left, and the direction of both faces toward that
side. In 3, the greater part of C.'s figure on Left is opposed by the
direction of his lines and movement to Right. Thus these three
pictures, whether or not they are considered as presenting a balance,
at least show several well-defined factors which detach themselves
from the general symmetrical scheme. (1) Interest in C. is opposed by
outward-pointing line; (2) greater mass, by outward-pointing line,
deep vista, and direction of attention; and (3) again interest by
direction of line and suggestion of movement.

This analysis of several aesthetically pleasing but asymmetrical
arrangements of space strongly suggests that the elements of large
size, deep perspective, suggested movement, and intrinsic interest are
in some way equivalent in their power to arouse those motor impulses
which we believe to constitute the basis of aesthetic response. It is
the purpose of these experiments to follow up the lines of these
suggestions, reducing them to their simplest forms and studying them
under exact conditions.

But before describing the instruments and methods of this experimental
treatment, I wish to speak of the articles on the 'AEsthetics of Simple
Form,' published as Studies from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory,
by Dr. Edgar Pierce.[15] These articles, sub-entitled 'Symmetry' and
'The Functions of the Elements' seem at first sight to anticipate the
discussions of this paper; but a short analysis shows that while they
point in the same direction, they nevertheless deal with quite
different questions and in a different manner. In the statement of his
problem, indeed, Dr. Pierce is apparently treading the same path.

[15] Pierce E.: PSYCH. REV., 1894, I., p. 483; 1896, III., p.
270.

He says: "Can a feeling of symmetry, that is, of aesthetical equality
of the two halves, remain where the two sides are not geometrically
identical; and if so, what are the conditions under which this can
result--what variations of one side seem aesthetically equal to the
variations of the other side?" Some preliminary experiments resulted
in the conclusion that an unsymmetrical and yet pleasing arrangement
of a varied content rests on the pleasure in unity, thus shutting out
the Golden Section choice, which depends on the pleasure in variety.
That is, the choices made will not in general follow the golden
section, but 'when the figure consists of two halves, the pleasure
must be a feeling of aesthetical symmetry.'

The final experiments were arrangements of lines and simple figures on
a square, black background in which the center was marked by a white
vertical line with a blue or a red line on each side. On one side of
these central lines a line was fixed; and the subject had to place on
the other side lines and simple figures of different sizes and
different colors, so as to balance the fixed line. The results showed
that lines of greater length, or figures of greater area must be put
nearer the center than shorter or smaller ones--'A short line must be
farther than a long one, a narrow farther than a wide, a line farther
than a square; an empty interval must be larger than one filled, and
so on.' And for colors, "blue, maroon and green, the dark colors, are
the farthest out; white, red and orange, the bright colors, are
nearest the center. This means that a dark color must be farther out
than a bright one to compensate for a form on the other side. The
brightness of an object is then a constant substitute for its distance
in satisfying our feeling of symmetry."

Now from these conclusions two things are clear. By his extremely
emphasized central line, and his explicit question to the subjects,
'Does this balance?' the author has excluded any other point of view
than that of mechanical balance. His central fulcrum is quite
overpowering. Secondly, his inquiry has dealt only with size and
color, leaving the questions of interest, movement, and perspective
untouched. But just the purpose of this experimental study is to seek
for the different and possibly conflicting tendencies in composition,
and to approximate to the conditions given in pictorial art. It is
evident, I think, that the two studies on symmetry will not trespass
on each other's territory. The second paper of Dr. Pierce, on 'The
Functions of the Elements,' deals entirely with the relation of
horizontal and vertical positions of the aesthetic object and of the
subject to aesthetic judgments, and has therefore no bearing on this
paper.

For his apparatus Dr. Pierce used a surface of black cloth stretched
over black rubber, 1 m. square. Now an investigation which is to deal
with complicated and varied relations, resembling those of pictures,
demands an instrument resembling them also in the shape of the
background. A rectangle 600 mm. broad by 400 mm. high seemed to meet
this requirement better than the square of Dr. Pierce. Other parts,
also, of his instrument seemed unfitted for our purpose. The tin, 5
cm. broad and confined to the slits across the center of the square,
gave not enough opportunity for movement in a vertical direction,
while the scale at the back was very inconvenient for reading. To
supply these lacks, a scale graduated in millimeters was attached on
the lower edge of the board, between a double track in which ran
slides, the positions of which could be read on the scale. To the
slides were attached long strips of tin covered with black cloth. On
these strips figures glued to small clamps or clasps could be slipped
up or down; this arrangement of cooerdinates made it possible to place
a figure in any spot of the whole surface without bringing the hands
into the field of view. The experiments were made in a dark room, in
which the apparatus was lighted by an electric globe veiled by white
paper and hung above and behind the head of the subject, so as not to
be seen by him and to cast no shadow: in this soft light of course the
black movable strips disappeared against the black background. A gray
paper frame an inch and a half wide was fitted to the black rectangle
to throw it up against the black depths of the dark room--thus giving
in all details the background of a picture to be composed.

The differences in method between the two sets of experiments were
fundamental. In Dr. Pierce's experiments the figures were pulled from
one side to the other of the half-square in question, and the subject
was asked to stop them where he liked; in those of the writer the
subject himself moved the slides back and forth until a position was
found aesthetically satisfactory. The subject was never asked, Does
this balance? He was indeed requested to abstract from the idea of
balance, but to choose that position which was the most immediately
pleasing for its own sake, and so far as possible detached from
associations.

I have said that Dr. Pierce intentionally accentuated the center. The
conditions of pictorial composition suggest in general the center only
by the rectangular frame. Most of my experiments were, therefore, made
without any middle line; some were repeated with a middle line of fine
white silk thread, for the purpose of ascertaining the effect of the
enhanced suggestion of the middle line.

But the chief difference came in the different treatment of results.
Dr. Pierce took averages, whereas the present writer has interpreted
individual results. Now, suppose that one tendency led the subject to
place the slide at 50 and another to place it at 130 mm. from the
center. The average of a large number of such choices would be 90--a
position very probably disagreeable in every way. For such an
investigation it was evident that interpretation of individual results
was the only method possible, except where it could be conclusively
shown that the subjects took one and only one point of view. They were
always encouraged to make a second choice if they wished to do so, as
it often happened that one would say: 'I like both of these ways very
much.' Of course, individual testimony would be of the highest
importance, and a general grouping into classes and indication of the
majority tendency would be the only way to treat the results
statistically. And indeed in carrying out the experiments this caution
was found absolutely necessary. In all but one or two of the sections,
the taking of averages would have made the numerical results
absolutely unintelligible. Only the careful study of the individual
case, comparison of various experiments on the same person to find
personal tendencies, and comparison of the different tendencies, could
give valuable results for the theory of symmetry.

The first question to be taken up was the influence of right and left
positions on choice. A long series of experiments was undertaken with
a line 80x10 mm. on one side and a line 160x10 mm. on the other, in
which the positions of these were reversed, and each in turn taken as
fixed and variable, with a view to determining the effect of right and
left positions. No definite conclusions emerged; and in the following
experiments, most of which have been made for both right and left
positions, the results will be treated as if made for one side alone,
and, where averages are taken, will be considered as indifferently
left or right.

The experiments of Dr. Pierce were made for only one position of the
fixed line--at 12 cm. distance from the center. The characteristic of
the following experiments is their reference to all positions of the
fixed line. For instance a fixed line, 10 cm. in length at 12 cm.
distance from the center, might be balanced by a line 5 cm. in length
at 20 cm. distance. But would the distance be in the same proportion
for a given distance of the fixed line of say 20 or 25 cm.? It is
clear that only a progressive series of positions of the fixed line
would suggest the changes in points of view or tendencies of choice of
the subject. Accordingly, for all the experiments the fixed line or
other object was placed successively at distances of 20, 40, 60 mm.,
etc., from the center; or at 40, 80 mm., etc., according to the
character of the object, and for each of these fixed points the
subject made one or two choices. Only an understanding of the
direction in which the variable series moved gave in many cases an
explanation for the choice.

Each choice, it should be added, was itself the outcome of a long
series of trials to find the most pleasing position. Thus, each
subject made only about ten choices in an hour, each of which, as it
appears in the tables, represents a large number of approximations.

_B. Experiments on Size._

I have said that different tendencies or types of choice in
arrangement appeared. It will be convenient in the course of
explaining in detail the method of experiment, to discuss at the same
time the meaning of these types of choice.

From analysis of the pictures, the simplest suggestion of balance
appeared in the setting off against each other of objects of different
sizes;--an apparent equivalence of a large object near the center with
a small object far from the center; thus inevitably suggesting the
relations of the mechanical balance, or lever, in which the heavy
short arm balances the light long arm. This was also the result of
Dr. Pierce's experiments for one position of his fixed line. The
experiments which follow, however, differ in some significant points
from this result. The instrument used was the one described in the
preceding section. On one side, in the middle of the vertical strip,
was placed the 'fixed' line, denoted by F., and the subject moved the
'variable' line, denoted by V., until he found the arrangement
aesthetically pleasing. The experimenter alone placed F. at the given
reading, and read off the position of V. After the choice F. was
placed at the next interval, V. was again tried in different
positions, and so on. In the following tables the successive positions
of F. are given in the left column, reading downward, and the
corresponding positions of V. in the right column. The different
choices are placed together, but in case of any preference the second
choice is indicated. The measurements are always in millimeters. Thus,
F. 40, V. 60, means that F. is 40 mm. to one side of the center, and
V. 60 mm. to the opposite side. F. 80x10, V. 160x10, means that the
white cardboard strips 80 mm.x10 mm., etc., are used. The minus sign
prefixed to a reading means that the variable was placed on the side
of the fixed line. An X indicates aesthetic dislike--refusal to choose.
An asterisk (*) indicates a second choice.

The following tables are specimen sets made by the subjects _C, O_,
and _D_.

I. (a) F. 80x10, V. 160x10.

F. V.
C. O. D.

40 62, 120 166, 130 28, 24
80 70, 110 104, 102 80, 126
120 46, X 70, 46 68,--44, 128*
160 26, 96 50, 25 85, 196,--88*
200 20, X 55, X --46, 230,* 220,--110*

I. (b) F. 160x10, V. 80x10.

F. V.
C. O. D.

40 74, 64 60, 96 27, 34
80 76, 65 72, 87 55, 138
120 60, 56 48, 82 70, 174
160 29, 74 16, 77 --114, 140, 138, 200
200 96, 36 25, 36 177,--146,--148, 230

Now, on Dr. Pierce's theory, the variable in the first set should be
nearer the center, since it is twice the size of the fixed line;--but
the choices V. 120, 166, 130 for F. 40; V. 110, 104, 102, 126 for F.
80; V. 128 for F. 120; V. 196 for F. 160; V. 230, 220 for F. 200, show
that other forces are at work. If these variations from the expected
were slight, or if the presence of second choices did not show a
certain opposition or contrast between the two positions, they might
disappear in an average. But the position of F. 40, over against V.
120, 166, 130, is evidently not a chance variation. Still more
striking are the variations for I. (_b_). Here we should expect the
variable, being smaller, to be farther from the center. But for F. 40,
we have V. 27, 34; for F. 80, all nearer but two; for F. 120, V. 60,
56, 48, 82, 70; for F. 160, V. 29, 74, 16, 77, 138, and for F. 200, V.
96, 36, 25, 36, 177--while several positions on the same side of the
center as the constant show a point of view quite irreconcilable with
mechanical balance.