Consciousness, Literature and the Arts
Archive
Volume 4 Number 3, December 2003
_______________________________________________________________
Reviewed by
Dorothée
Halcour’s book What is the Effect of Art? On the Psychology of Aesthetic Experience
(written in German) stretches over an impressive 369 pages in small print. The
book’s stated aim is to design a “general theory of aesthetic experience”
and to subsequently support this theory with the help of a series of case
studies. (p. 17) “General” means here that all
psychic processes – as well as their coordination – are considered. The
author wants to establish three points: What modes of aesthetic experience
exist? How do they evolve? And why do they provoke certain reactions?
In
principle, the book presents a huge collection of case studies which are
described with painstaking exactitude. The energy that went into this book,
which was submitted in 2000 as a thesis at the University of Bamberg, Germany,
is notable. In his preface to the book, Dietrich Dörner praises the balanced
proportion of theoretical organization and empirical description. Having myself
made an effort penetrate the forest of facts presented in this book, I must say
that I do not share his opinion. A structure more streamlined in terms of theory
would have made any appreciation of facts easier and more likely. I am not
saying that the introduction of more theoretical material would have made the
book more readable. The problem is rather that the book seems to have grown
organically out of empirical considerations and that its composition does not
seem to have been guided from the beginning by a preexisting, theoretical
structure.
A
look at the table of contents perhaps makes clear what I mean. The table of
contents stretches over six and a half pages. The thirteen chapters are divided
into many sub-chapters and sub-sub-chapters etc. All together, there are 192
chapters and sub-chapters. This is more than any normal reader can handle.
The
author, in her explanation of the structure of her approach, chooses to work
with neutral “components” (Modelbausteine). Her goal is to create an overall
image (Gesamtmodell) composed of the different pieces. However, in the end, this
“image” remains too kaleidoscopic; an elaboration of a progressive structure
would have been more useful than the model of components that can be freely
arranged.
In
general, the author describes in the most honest way possible what happens when
we experience art. One might object that this is very difficult to do unless one
already has a theoretical concept in mind by which to restrain the immense field
of “aesthetic experience.” Most readers like to discern, after having read
the title and the introduction of a book, a hint concerning the direction of the
argument along the lines of: ‘she believes that aesthetic experience is like this
and not like that and she is going
to convince us of her opinion.’ Simply saying: ‘I want to show what
aesthetic experience is like,’ is, in my opinion, not enough, at least not
with regard to such a subject which is, by nature, extremely vague, open, and
furthermore has already been developed into all thinkable directions.
At
the beginning one still tries to cling to apparently central questions like:
“But what exactly is aesthetic experience? What are the psychological
processes which it is accompanied by like? And why is aesthetic experience
characterized by such a large variety of possibilities?” (p. 3) While this
seems to point to a meta-theme able to coordinate the individual studies, it
turns out that very similar sentences occasionally appear in the book until the
end, without showing any signs of evolution.
Suggestions
as to what a more original theme could
be, flow out of the book itself, and are touched upon in many places, but never
lead to an end. There is, for example, the interesting “intercultural
aspect” of aesthetic experience. The author’s approach consists of
presenting a number of paintings to a certain number of people and to note the
people’s spontaneous reactions. These people do also come from different
cultures (European, Indian). Instead
of using this “intercultural input” as a cornerstone of the research, “the
Indians” appear in the middle of the book almost like by coincidence.
Interesting points are noted about their “strange” reactions. But soon the
“Indians” disappear, only to turn up again here and there towards the end.
Equally interesting topics are that of the “feeling of competence”
and that of the problem of “non-determination,” which are elaborated on more
extensively, albeit without reaching a considerable level of originality.
When it comes to “theories,” they are extremely general, and even
further generalized (“How does one create a theory,” sub-chapter 2.2). The
already general question “what is aesthetic experience” is further
generalized, thus providing new sub-chapters with titles like “why do people
deal with art?” (p. 37) This leads to lengthy, more general reflections about
“what is art?” and “is the striving after beauty specifically human?”
(p. 58), making us loose sight of any possible focal subject.
The same is true
for basic introductions into the theory of psychological aesthetics, which are
not bad as such, but which further postpone the argumentative line that the
reader is looking for so desperately.
Even at an advanced stage of the examination, simplistic phrases about aesthetics are recurrent, such as: “Boredom can arise when all desires are satisfied and no further work remains to be done. There, a free space arises, a space that one normally would like to use in order to recover until the next desire forces us to quit the cozy state of laziness” (p. 64). A preliminary conclusion delivered on p. 67 is no more satisfying as it states that “we can note that indirect and direct factors cooperate within aesthetic experience.” Nor do systematic repetitions of banalities enhance the pleasure of reading: “The reasons why humans deal with paintings can be very different. Aesthetic experience differs, depending on the emotional situation within which the people decide to turn towards the works of art” (p. 68). Or: “People are emotionally different. Therefore it is very likely that they also have different interests. Not all people like to deal with art.” Even if the experiments that follow proved these claims, one wonders if the claims themselves really need to be demonstrated experimentally.
After having been pushed through hundreds of interviews and their
interpretations, through digressions and dispersed, non-progressive arguments,
we are denied a conclusion. I must say that I do not really see what I have
learned from this book. It might be more interesting for people who work in
empirical psychology because it might show them how to empirically proceed in
certain situations. The general reader, however, who is versed in philosophy,
consciousness studies, or simply in the humanities, is unlikely to gain much
from this book. In this sense, the study remains just an exercise.