Psychology, Science and Art: Part 1

There is one topic which has endessly inspired my passion for the creative industry; psychology. It is a fact that everything is interconnected, a process of ongoing relationships between the conscious and subconscious that determines who we are as individuals and the way in which we look at creative imagery/ art.

Our perspective could perhaps be compared to that of an individual fingerprint; no two entirely identical as they are tailored to our personal experiences, knowledge and chemical reactions formed by highly complex processes in our brains.

There are two key elements that form our perspective on visual art:

Nativistic Perception: Eye and brain matched synchrony transforming electromagnetic energy into neurochemical codes.

Directed Perception: Based on personal history and knowledge.

I would argue that art is one of THE most intellectual industries; one that stimulates our minds and inspires positivity- both elements that I believe we require as human beings. Art was 'invented' (perhaps recognized would be a better word as art can arguably be created in nature too... hence the Peacock above) as we have evolved over thousands of years, suggesting it can only be acquired by a highly complex brain. As we attain more awareness of both the physical and psychological world; art has refined itself from a literal interpretation to that with more conceptual meaning and depth.

 Prehistoric Cave Art

            |

            |

            |

            \/

Pre Raphaelite Art (1000s of years later)

          Pre Raphaelite Art

            |

            |

            |

            \/

Pop Art (over 100 years later)

As the human conscious has evolved with, and perhaps through art, new artistic movements follow. As an example, the era of Pop Art wouldn't have been relevant to the 19th century as the movements that happened between this time all led to the Pop Art movement. As we have become more complex beings, we are able to process information more efficiently/effectively, however the previous movement must have arguably occurred to lead to the next.

There is always the wonder of how much our directed perception (personal knowledge & history) affects us however, whether artistic thought is led more objectively through our nativistic perception (chemical codes) than we are led to think.

I believe that we have currently found ourselves at a very exciting/ scary time in art as the industry has become saturated very rapidly by the dominance of the technology era. Art and information is now 1000% more easily attainable (a personal, not factual guess!) and although indirectly related, human relationships have changed too, no doubt modifying the ever fluctuating ideals of society.

My opinion is that to become more knowledgeable and personalised in the field of art, you need to nurture your relationship between the conscious and subconscious...after all, psychology is an undeniable force to be reckoned with whether you like it or not.

Alice Luker
www.aliceluker.co.uk