Search Details

Word: fehrenbach (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...hand, Fehrenbach argues that asking subjects to respond to a work of art to analyze what’s happening in the brain can’t offer anything more than simple questions to an audience or to oneself. On the other hand, he stresses that this type of research-oriented approach is only a new substitute for formalism and places an undue emphasis on immediate response. Neurological or psychological studies could easily fall short in explaining such instantaneous reactions. If scientists observe that subjects have similar responses to a work of art, can they necessarily prove that similar mental...

Author: By Joshua J. Kearney, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Painting Perception | 2/9/2010 | See Source »

Touching again on the methodological, Fehrenbach recalls Margaret Livingstone’s explanation of Mona Lisa’s smile. “Now someone is giving us a scientific explanation for it, and there are a few ways that you can respond to it. First of all, you can say great, finally that has been explained by scientific fact. Or you can say, well does that mean, since I do not agree with the floating emotion in the Mona Lisa, does that mean that my neurologic apparatus is not okay? … I would simply say that...

Author: By Joshua J. Kearney, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Painting Perception | 2/9/2010 | See Source »

Ultimately, the biggest problem for Fehrenbach is not the research itself or its impact on art history, but the implicit promise that we will be able to develop a new art theory. “It’s impossible to create a set of categories that would allow you to understand what art is or how it works on us,” he says...

Author: By Joshua J. Kearney, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Painting Perception | 2/9/2010 | See Source »

Despite even these gravest of doubts, Fehrenbach admits that in certain areas the approaches taken by Cavanagh, Livingstone, and the Vision Sciences Laboratory in the interpretation of artworks could be a fertile foundation for greater understanding. These areas, however, are not particularly numerous; nor do they initially seem to offer the same boundless opportunity that researchers like Cavanagh envision in the confluence between art history and the science of perception...

Author: By Joshua J. Kearney, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Painting Perception | 2/9/2010 | See Source »

...into the cultural mainstream. Cavanagh, in discussing whether a background understanding of visual perception can inform the study of art, acknowledges that it certainly depends upon what the individual in question is interested in studying. He gives precedence to an understanding through symbolism and cultural context in many instances. Fehrenbach, too, occupies a bit of this middle ground: “To put the sensual part of art back on the agenda is absolutely important,” he says. “Art theory sometimes tends to contextualize too much, but it should start with the perceptual qualities...

Author: By Joshua J. Kearney, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Painting Perception | 2/9/2010 | See Source »

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next