Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Surveying the Imagination Landscape
- Part I Theoretical Perspectives on the Imagination
- Part II Imagery-Based Forms of the Imagination
- Part III Intentionality-Based Forms of the Imagination
- Part IV Novel Combinatorial Forms of the Imagination
- Part V Phenomenology-Based Forms of the Imagination
- 34 Imagination in the Philosophy of Art
- 35 Imagination in Aesthetic Experience
- 36 The Arts and Human Symbolic Cognition: Art is for Social Communication
- 37 Aesthetic Engagement: Lessons from Art History, Neuroscience, and Society
- 38 Dance and the Imagination: Be a Butterfly!
- 39 Imagination, Intersubjectivity, and a Musical Therapeutic Process: A Personal Narrative
- Part VI Altered States of the Imagination
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
35 - Imagination in Aesthetic Experience
from Part V - Phenomenology-Based Forms of the Imagination
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 May 2020
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Surveying the Imagination Landscape
- Part I Theoretical Perspectives on the Imagination
- Part II Imagery-Based Forms of the Imagination
- Part III Intentionality-Based Forms of the Imagination
- Part IV Novel Combinatorial Forms of the Imagination
- Part V Phenomenology-Based Forms of the Imagination
- 34 Imagination in the Philosophy of Art
- 35 Imagination in Aesthetic Experience
- 36 The Arts and Human Symbolic Cognition: Art is for Social Communication
- 37 Aesthetic Engagement: Lessons from Art History, Neuroscience, and Society
- 38 Dance and the Imagination: Be a Butterfly!
- 39 Imagination, Intersubjectivity, and a Musical Therapeutic Process: A Personal Narrative
- Part VI Altered States of the Imagination
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Imagination – either explicitly or implicitly – plays an important role in contemporary conceptions of creativity. In contrast, imagination has not been given the same weight in most mainstream modern models of aesthetic experience. I argue that imagination is an important component of aesthetic experience in at least two ways. First, imagination likely guides our search for meaning when interacting with artworks. It can do so by driving our search for the underlying concepts and causes that originated the artwork, as well as facilitating internally generated thoughts. Second, imagination can facilitate transitions from states of uncertainty to states of increased predictability in the course of interacting with artworks. As such, models of aesthetic experience would benefit by explicitly incorporating imagination into their frameworks.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination , pp. 578 - 592Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Abraham, A. (2016). The Imaginative Mind. Human Brain Mapping, 37, 4197–4211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnheim, R. (1954/1974). Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belfi, A. M., Vessel, E. A., Brielmann, A., et al. (2019). Dynamics of Aesthetic Experience Are Reflected in the Default-Mode Network. Neuroimage, 188, 584–597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Brown, S., Gao, X., Tisdelle, L., Eickhoff, S. B., and Liotti, M. (2011). Naturalizing Aesthetics: Brain Areas for Aesthetic Appraisal across Sensory Modalities. Neuroimage, 58, 250–258.Google Scholar
Bullot, N. J., and Reber, R. (2013). A Psycho-Historical Research Program for the Integrative Science of Art. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 163–180.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind Variation and Selective Retentions in Creative Thought as in Other Knowledge Processes. Psychological Review, 67, 380–400.Google Scholar
Cavanna, A. E. (2007). The Precuneus and Consciousness. CNS Spectrums, 12, 545–552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavanna, A. E., and Trimble, M. R. (2006). The Precuneus: A Review of its Functional Anatomy and Behavioural Correlates. Brain, 129, 564–583.Google Scholar
Cela-Conde, C. J., Garcia-Prieto, J., Ramasco, J., et al. (2013). Dynamics of Brain Networks in the Aesthetic Appreciation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 110 (Suppl. 2), 10454–10461.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Burke, C., Hsu, A., and Swami, V. (2010). Personality Predictors of Artistic Preferences as a Function of the Emotional Valence and Perceived Complexity of Paintings. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4, 196–204.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Reimers, S., Hsu, A., and Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Who Art Thou? Personality Predictors of Artistic Preferences in a Large UK Sample: The Importance of Openness. British Journal of Psychology, 100, 501–516.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, A., and Vartanian, O. (2014). Neuroaesthetics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 370–375.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, A., and Vartanian, O.(2016). Neuroscience of Aesthetics. Annals in the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369, 172–194.Google Scholar
Cunningham, S. I., Tomasi, D., and Volkow, N. D. (2017). Structural and Functional Connectivity of the Precuneus and Thalamus to the Default Mode Network. Human Brain Mapping, 38, 938–956.Google Scholar
Cupchik, G. C. (2016). The Aesthetics of Emotion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cupchik, G. C., Vartanian, O., Crawley, A., and Mikulis, D. J. (2009). Viewing Artworks: Contributions of Cognitive Control and Perceptual Facilitation to Aesthetic Experience. Brain and Cognition, 70, 84–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fayn, K., MacCann, C., Tiliopoulos, N., and Silvia, P. J. (2015). Aesthetic Emotions and Aesthetic People: Openness Predicts Sensitivity to Novelty in the Experiences of Interest and Pleasure. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, article 1877.Google Scholar
Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Aesthetik [Experimental Aesthetics: “Pre-School” of Aesthetics]. Leipzig, Germany: Breitkopf & Härtel.Google Scholar
Fink, A., Benedek, M., Grabner, R. H., Staudt, B., and Neubauer, A. C. (2007). Creativity Meets Neuroscience: Experimental Tasks for the Neuroscientific Study of Creative Thinking. Methods, 42, 68–76.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., and Walker, J. (2001). The Influence of Personality Traits, Previous Experience of Art, and Demographic Variables on Artistic Preference. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 997–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, L. K. M., and Landwehr, J. R. (2015). A Dual-Process Perspective on Fluency-Based Aesthetics: The Pleasure-Interest Model of Aesthetic Liking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 395–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graf, L. K. M., and Landwehr, J. R.(2017). Aesthetic Pleasure versus Aesthetic Interest: The Two Routes to Aesthetic Liking. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, article 15.Google Scholar
Hall, S. E., Schubert, E., and Wilson, S. J. (2016). The Role of Trait and State Absorption in the Enjoyment of Music. PLoS One, 11, e0164029.Google Scholar
Huang, M., Bridge, H., Kemp, M. J., and Parker, A. J. (2011). Human Cortical Activity Evoked by the Assignment of Authenticity when Viewing Works of Art. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5, 134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishai, A., Fairhall, S. L., and Pepperell, R. (2007). Perception, Memory and Aesthetics of Indeterminate Art. Brain Research Bulletin, 73, 319–324.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., and Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big Five Trait Taxonomy. In John, O. P., Robbins, R. W., and Pervin, L. A. (eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 114–158.Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., and Lebuda, I. (2016). The Big Five, the Huge Two, and Creative Self-Beliefs: A Meta-Analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10, 214–232.Google Scholar
Kirk, U., Skov, M., Hulme, O., Christensen, M. S., and Zeki, S. (2009). Modulation of Aesthetic Value by Semantic Context: An fMRI Study. Neuroimage, 44, 1125–1132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., and Augustin, D. (2004). A Model of Aesthetic Appreciation and Aesthetic Judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489–508.Google Scholar
Leder, H., and Nadal, M. (2014). Ten Years of a Model of Aesthetic Appreciation and Aesthetic Judgments: The Aesthetic Episode – Developments and Challenges in Empirical Aesthetics. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 443–464.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. (1990). The Clockwork Muse: The Predictability of Artistic Change. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
McManus, I. C. (2013). “The Anti-Developmental, the Anti-Narrative, the Anti-Historical”: Mondrian as a Paradigmatic Artist for Empirical Aesthetics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 152–153.Google Scholar
McManus, I. C., and Furnham, A. (2006). Aesthetic Activities and Aesthetic Attitudes: Influences of Education, Background and Personality on Interest and Involvement in the Arts. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 555–587.Google Scholar
Meyer, M. L., Hershfield, H. E., Waytz, A. G., Mildner, J. N., and Tamir, D. I. (2019). Creative Expertise Is Associated with Transcending the Here and Now. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 483–494.Google Scholar
Newman, G. E., and Bloom, P. (2012). Art and Authenticity: The Importance of Originals in Judgments of Value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 558–569.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. E. (1962). Studies on the Generality of Affective Meaning Systems. American Psychologist, 17, 10–28.Google Scholar
Pelowski, M., Markey, P. S., Forster, M., Gerger, G., and Leder, H. (2017). Move Me, Astonish Me … Delight my Eyes and Brain: The Vienna Integrated Model of Top-Down and Bottom-Up Processes in Art Perception (VIMAP) and Corresponding Affective, Evaluative, and Neurophysiological Correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80–125.Google Scholar
Rawlings, D. (2003). Personality Correlates of Liking for “Unpleasant” Paintings and Photographs. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 395–410.Google Scholar
Rhodes, L. A., David, D. C., and Combs, A. L. (1988). Absorption and Enjoyment of Music. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 737–738.Google Scholar
Sheppard, A. (1991). The Role of Imagination in Aesthetic Experience. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 25, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silveira, S., Fehse, K., Vedder, A., Elvers, K., and Hennig-Fast, K. (2015). Is It the Picture or Is It the Frame? An fMRI Study on the Neurobiology of Framing Effects. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, article 528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., and O’Connor, A. (2009). Openness to Experience, Plasticity, and Creativity: Exploring Lower-Order, High-Order, and Interactive Effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1087–1090.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity as Blind Variation and Selective Retention: Is the Creative Process Darwinian? Psychological Inquiry, 10, 309–328.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K.(2007). The Creative Imagination in Picasso’s Guernica Sketches: Monotonic Improvements or Nonmonotonic Variants? Creativity Research Journal, 19, 329–344.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K.(2013). Creative Thought as Blind Variation and Selective Retention: Why Creativity Is Inversely Related to Sightedness. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 33, 253–266.Google Scholar
Skov, M., and Vartanian, O. (eds.) (2009). Neuroaesthetics. Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Specker, E., Tinio, P. P. L., and van Elk, M. (2017). Do You See What I See? An Investigation of the Aesthetic Experience in the Laboratory and Museum. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tellegen, A., and Atkinson, G. (1974). Openness to Absorbing and Self-Altering Experiences (“Absorption”), a Trait Related to Hypnotic Susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 268–277.Google Scholar
Tinio, P. P. L. (2013). From Artistic Creation to Aesthetic Reception: The Mirror Model of Art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7, 265–275.Google Scholar
van de Cruys, S., and Wagemans, J. (2011). Putting Reward in Art: A Tentative Prediction Error Account of Visual Art. i-Perception, 2, 1035–1062.Google Scholar
Vartanian, O., and Skov, M. (2014). Neural Correlates of Viewing Paintings: Evidence from a Quantitative Meta-Analysis of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data. Brain and Cognition, 87, 52–56.Google Scholar
Vessel, E. A., Maurer, N., Denker, A. H., and Starr, G. G. (2018). Stronger Shared Taste for Natural Aesthetic Domains than for Artifacts of Human Nature. Cognition, 179, 121–131.Google Scholar
Vessel, E. A., Starr, G. G., and Rubin, N. (2012). The Brain on Art: Intense Aesthetic Experience Activates the Default Mode Network. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, article 66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, T., Mo, L., Vartanian, O., Cant, J. S., and Cupchik, G. (2015). An Investigation of the Neural Substrates of Mind Wandering Induced by Viewing Traditional Chinese Landscape Paintings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, article 1018.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., and Sifonis, C. M. (2004). The Role of Specificity and Abstraction in Creative Idea Generation. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 1–9.Google Scholar
Wild, T. C., Kuiken, D., and Schopflocher, D. (1995). The Role of Absorption in Experiential Involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 569–579.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by