How a Painter Paints: An Interdisciplinary Understanding of Embodied Creativity

Aus de_evolutionary_art_org
Version vom 19. Januar 2015, 22:13 Uhr von Gbachelier (Diskussion | Beiträge)

(Unterschied) ← Nächstältere Version | Aktuelle Version (Unterschied) | Nächstjüngere Version → (Unterschied)
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche


Choi S. K., Steve DiPaola: How a Painter Paints: An Interdisciplinary Understanding of Embodied Creativity. In: Proc. Electronic Visualisation and the Arts, pp. 127-134. British Computer Society, London, 2013.



How may we access, represent and preserve the lived experience tacitly embodied in the artist? How may one begin to describe the continuous process of creativity? Artists investigate these questions every day. Their answers lay in their work and it is to these exuvia of expression, the artefacts of experience, which we turn to for our data.

Drawing from the seminal definition of the principles of abstract art posed by Wassily Kandinsky in the early years of the twentieth century, and contextualizing that knowledge in contemporary cognitive metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999), the study attempts to arrive at an understanding of how cognitive structure emerges in pragmatic self-observation during the artistic process. Through application of the concept of “enaction” (Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1991), the research proposes a first-person approach to the exploration and derivation of the syntax of interactive creativity.

We attempt to define and visualize (see figures) a cognitive framework capable of representing the artist’s pre-expressive state (the tacit) and its relationship to the final realized artwork on canvas (the trace). An artist’s embodied experience constitutes an experiential understanding of interactive creativity, an understanding that takes as its foundation the practice of intentional expression and reflective self-observation of contextual response (Fig. 1, Fig. 2).


Extended Abstract


Used References

Arnheim, Rudolf. (1954/1974). Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Baars, Bernard. (1988). A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York.

Choi, SK. (2013). Painting Time: The metaphor of texture. MA thesis, Simon Fraser University, BC. Available at

Cytowic, Richard E. (2002). Synesthesia: A Union of the Senses (2nd Edition). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Deleuze, G and Parnet, C. (1977/1987). Dialogues. (Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam, Trans.). Columbia University Press, New York. (p vii).

Dewey, J. (1934/1989). “Art as Experience”. Reprinted in John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925– 1953, Vol. 10. Boydston, J. (ed.). Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Dewey, J. (1929/1958). Experience and Nature. Open Court Pub. Co., La Salle, Ill.

DiPaola, S, (2009). Exploring a Parameterized Portrait Painting Space, International Journal of Art and Technology, Vol 2, No 1-2, pp 82-93.

Gilmore, J. (2006). Brain Trust: On art and the new biology of mind. Artforum International, Vol. 44, No. 10 pp. 121-122.

Gregory, R. L. (1987). Perceptions as Hypotheses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 290, pp. 181-197.

Gregory, R. L. (1966/1997). Eye and Brain: The psychology of seeing. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.

Ione, A. (2000). An Inquiry into Paul Cezanne: The Role of the Artist in Studies of Perception and Consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 7, No. 8–9, pp. 57–74.

Johnson, Mark. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, Reason. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Kandinsky, Wassily. (1947/1979). Point and Line to Plane. Dover, New York, NY.

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books, New York, NY.

Lakoff, George. (1987/1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

Land, MF. (2006). Eye movements and the control of actions in everyday life. Progress in Retinal and Eye Research 25 pp. 296–324.

Levinson, J. (2007). “Artworks as Artifacts”. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence. (Eds.). (2007). Creations of the Mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation. (pp. 74-82). Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.

Margolis, Eric & Laurence, Stephen. (Eds.). (2007). Creations of the Mind: Theories of Artifacts and Their Representation. Oxford University Press, New York.

Miall, R. C. and Tchalenko, J. (2001). A Painter's Eye Movements: A Study of Eye and Hand Movement during Portrait Drawing. Leonardo, 34-1, (pp. 35-40): The MIT Press.

Polanyi, M. (1983). The Tacit Dimension. Peter Smith, Gloucester, MA.

Redies, C. (2007). “A Universal Model of Esthetic Perception Based on the Sensory Coding of Natural Stimuli.” Spatial Vision 21 (1-2): 97–117.

Varela, F., Thompson, E., Rosch, E. (1991/1999). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Ramachandran V and Hirstein, W. (1999). The Science of Art A Neurological Theory of Aesthetic Experience.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, No. 6-7, pp. 15–51.

Wollheim, R. (1987). Painting as an Art. Thames and Hudson, London.

Zeki, S. (2001). Artistic Creativity and the Brain. Science 6. July 2001: Vol. 293 no. 5527 (pp. 51- 52): DOI: 10.1126/science.1062331


Full Text

intern file

Sonstige Links