Study of One of Sani al-Molk’s One Thousand and One Night Illustrations From Visual Perception Theory of Gestalt

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate of Art Research, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D., Associate Professor and Faculty Member, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

General principles of Gestalt School of Psychology (Unified Whole) are codified by a group of German psychologists in early twentieth century. This approach is based on theories describing how the viewer tend to organize a series of simple visual elements into groups or unified wholes when certain principles are applied, and forms the overall system of visual perception. Development and promotion of such studies in domain of the visual arts is associated with the name of “Rudolf Arnheim”, the art theorist and psychologist (1904-2007). The present article aims to analyze five parts of an illustration of the ninety second night scene from One Thousand and One Night Collection from Sani al-Molk (1813-1886) based on Rudolf Ainheim’s definition of the principle of simplification in “visual perception” theory of Gestalt School. This article is a descriptive analytical study which utilizes the documentary aspects of Sani al-Molk’s illustration aiming to sharpening the contour text structure of “Ali ibn Bokar and Shams al-Nahar”. In addition, by levelling the structure of the five parts of this illustration, the purpose is to study on recognition of the visual components in the embodiment of the same concept. Although this illustration do not seem to be precise enough, the findings show that the viewer, even if not familiar with the story, would be able (by means of mental perceptions) to perceive the whole concept spontaneously, through simplifying the illustration, and reproduce it by means of visual perception of Gestalt, and consequently achieve the main elements of each part of the illustration, and perceive the overall concept of the story. In a broader sense, having compared five parts of  this illustration with each other (as a research tool), we can realize Gestalt of a “unified whole”; i.e. the unity of form of the characters, and separation of the main spaces of the story. As a conclusion it seems that this study is significantly aligned with visual perception of Gestalt School in domain of psychology.

Keywords

References

Adler, Daniel. 2012. “The Formalist`s Compromise: Wölfflin and Psychology”. German Art History and Scientific Thought. Eds. Mitchell Frank and Daniel Adler. Abingdon: Routledge: 73-96.
Arnheim, Rudof. 1954. Art & Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Art. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Arnheim, Rudof . 1969. Visual Thinking. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Arnheim, Rudof. 1998. “Gombrich on Art and Psychology”. Journal of Aesthetic Educaton. Vol. 32. No. 2: 113-115.
Behrens, Roy R. 1998. “Art Design and Gestalt Theory”. Leonardo. Vol. 31. No. 4: 299- 303.
Bruce, Vicki & Green, Patrik & Geogeson, Mark. 2003. Visual perception. New York: Psychology Press.
Bryson, Norman. 1985. Vision and Painting. London: Yale University.
Carrasco, Andres. 2012. Merleau-Pontys Phenomenology of Painting, Gestalt, and Reversibility. Massachusetts: Boston College.
Didi-Huberman, Georges. 2003. “History and Image: Has the Epistemological Transformation Taken Place?”, The Art Historian: National Traditions and Institutional Practices. Ed. Michael Zimmermann. Williamstown: Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute: 128-146.
Dondis A. Donis. 1973. A Primer of Visual Literacy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Geremek, Adam & Greenlee, Mark & Magnussen, Svein. 2013. Perception Beyond Gestalt: Progress in Vision Research. New York: Psychology Press.
Ginger, serge. 2007. Gestalt Therapy. Trans. By Sarah Spargo & Sally Reeder. 9nd Ed. London: Kranc Book.
Gombrich, E.H. 1984. “Art History and Psychology in Vienna Fifty Years Ago”. Art Journal. Vol. 44. No. 2: 162-164.
Gordon. Ian. E. 2004. Theories of visual perception. 3nd Ed. New York: Psychology Press.
Hock, Howard. 1984. “Imaginary Perspective”. Cognitive Processes in the Perception of Art. Ed. W.R. Crozier & A.J Chapma. The Netherlands: Elsevier Science: 167- 188.
Kesner, Ladislav. 2010. “Neuroaesthetic: Real Promise or Real Delusion?”. The Aesthetic Dimension of Visual Culture. Eds. Ondřej Dadejdík & Jakub Stejskal. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing: 3- 17.
Kesner, Ladislav. 2014. “The Warburg/Arnheim effect: linking the cultural/social and perceptual psychology of art”.Art Historiography. No.11. December:1- 23.
McManus, I C & Stöver, Katharina & Kim, Do. 2011. “Arnheim's Gestalt theory of visual balance: Examining the compositional structure of art photographs and abstract images”.
I perception. Vol. 2. No 6: 615–647.
Mitrovic, Branco. 2013. “Visuality after Gombrich: the Innocence of the Eye and Modern Research in the Philosophy and Psychology of Perception”. Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte. Vol. 76. No. 1: 71- 90.
Rotman, Rojer & Verstegen, Ian. 2007. “Arnheim's lesson: Cubism, collage and Gestalt psychology”. Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 65. No. 3: 287-298.
Thompson, Kristin & Bordwell, David. 2007. “Simplicity, Clarity, Balance: A Tribute to Rudolf Arnheim”. http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2007/06/15/simplicity-clarity-balance-a-tribute-to-rudolf-arnheim/ ( Access Date: 13/09/2017, 5:30 p.m)
Thompson, Kristin & Bordwell, David. 2005. Arnheim, Gestalt and Art: A Psychological Theory. New York: Springer.
Thompson, Kristin & Bordwell, David. 2010. “A Classification of Perceptual Corrections of Perspective Distortions in Renaissance Painting”. Perception. Vol. 39: 677- 694.
Negareh Journal
Volume 13, Issue 45
April 2018
Pages 72-87

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 22 April 2017
  • Revise Date: 18 July 2017
  • Accept Date: 10 September 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics