Art and neuroscience have a symbiotic relationship; both
rely on each other to exist. The brain determines how we perceive artwork, and artwork
helps disseminate our knowledge about the brain.
Neuroscience is such a complicated study that it does not
reach the masses. For the most part,
only those that have a formal education in neuroscience have a deep knowledge
of the workings of the brain. However,
because everyone is completely dependent upon their brain, everyone should have
at least a basic knowledge of what our brains are capable of doing and how they
accomplish that. Artwork of neurons and
other aspects of neuroscience act as a printing press, to spread our current
knowledge of the brain to the larger population. The artwork that is most striking to me is,
Brainbow. Brainbow is a new way of
visualizing neurons using fluorescent proteins to distinguish individual
neurons.
Not only do artists portray aspects of neuroscience in their
artwork, but they rely on the brain to correctly portray art to their viewers. Our minds are what perceive art; without the
mind, art would not exist.
Neuroaesthetics is the study of the response of neural bases to the
viewing and creation of artwork. Digital
imaging of the brain reveals what parts of the brain are incited when viewing
different artwork.
Therefore, the merging of the two cultures of art and
neuroscience is necessary for the masses to obtain some knowledge about
neuroscience and for artists to evoke the desired emotions from their audience.
Brain
Imaging. Digital image. Toward a Brain-Based Theory of Beauty. International
Network for Neuroaesthetics, 11 Aug. 2011. Web. 17 May 2015.
Chatterdee,
Anjan. "Neuroaesthetics." The Scientist. N.p., 1 May 2014. Web. 15
May 2015.
<http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/39802/title/Neuroaesthetics/>.
Dentate Gyrus. Digital image.
GALLERY: The Art of Neuroscience Vol. II.
The Beautiful Brain, n.d. Web. 17 May, 2015.
<http://thebeautifulbrain.com/2010/10/gallery-the-art-of-neuroscience-vol-ii/>.
Frazzetto,
Giovanni, and Suzanne Anker. "Neuroculture." Nature Reviews
Neuroscience 10.11 (2009): n. pag. Web.
Hymans,
John. "Art and Neuroscience." The Quarterly Review of Biology 87.1
(2012): n. pag. Web. 17 May 2015.
<http://www.queens.ox.ac.uk/academics/hyman/files/art_and_neuroscience.pdf>.
Oculometer Nerve. Digital image. GALLERY: The Art of Neuroscience Vol. II.
The Beautiful Brain, n.d. Web. 16 May 2015.
<http://thebeautifulbrain.com/2010/10/gallery-the-art-of-neuroscience-vol-ii/>.
Schoonover,
Carl. "How to Look Inside the Brain." TED. N.p., Feb. 2012. Web. 17
May 2015. <http://www.ted.com/talks/carl_schoonover_how_to_look_inside_the_brain#t-124781>.
Vensa, Victoria. Neuroscience + Art Lectures
I-III. UCOnline. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 2015.
Hi Melinda,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your blog this week and thought that your emphasis on the binary relationship between art and science was really insightful. I thought you really captured how each of the two rely on each other-- which is essentially very true even though a lot of individuals don't think about it in this way. With your examples of Brainbow, it really made me realize another cool relationship between neuroscience and art-- in that art does not really need to create any new materials in order to create these aesthetic pieces, it can simply rely on the preexisting neurons of the brain and enhance them (as in the brainbow example). I also agree that it is important we have a basic understanding of the brain, in that it is so essential to our every day lives-- and I think that much as you suggested, art can be the solution for this dissemination of information.
Best,
Natalie