cybernetic approach to aesthetics
TRANSCRIPT
8/3/2019 Cybernetic Approach to Aesthetics
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cybernetic-approach-to-aesthetics 1/5
Leonardo
A Cybernetic Approach to AestheticsAuthor(s): Herbert W. FrankeReviewed work(s):Source: Leonardo, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Summer, 1977), pp. 203-206Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1573423 .
Accessed: 04/11/2011 17:55
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Leonardo.
http://www.jstor.org
8/3/2019 Cybernetic Approach to Aesthetics
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cybernetic-approach-to-aesthetics 2/5
Leonardo,Vol. 10, pp. 203-206. Pergamon Press 1977. Printed in Great Britain
A CYBERNETICPPROACH T O
AESTHETICS
Herbert W. Franke*
Abstract-The authorconsiders, nparticular,the informationcontained npicturesand the way in
which artistsproduce them and viewersrespondto them rom thepoint of view of cybernetics.He
pointsout (1) that the maximumrate at which he humanbraincanconsciouslyreceivediscrete tems
or bits of information rom the senses is about 16 bits/sec and (2) that,since the short-termmemorycanretain nformationforonlyabout10 sec (theperiodcan be extendedbymentalconcentration,but
duringsuch concentration the information nput is stopped), the brain can consciously process no
more than 160 bits at a time. These imitationsare thenused to examine the structureofpicturesand
of theprocess of viewing them.
The characteristicsof pictures,
theirinformation
asmessages
and the way they stimulate
emotional reactions in viewers are briefly discussed. The strategy and tactics used by artists to
captureand hold the interest of viewersof a picture are outlined.
Whilethe authorstates that it is not easy to measure the amountof information n an artworkand
to account or subjectivereactions to it, hebelievesthatcyberneticaesthetics willbringan end to the
era of sophistry in the discussionof art, because it providesa rational way for understanding he
humanphenomenonof art and of aestheticperception.
I. INTRODUCTION
In an excellent rticlenLeonardo,MichaelJ.Aptergives an insight into the relationshipbetween
cybernetics and art [1]. He points out that
cybernetics,andome of its related
aspects,such as
the theoretical tudiesof information haracteris-
tics,controlsystemsandautomata,maybeappliedusefullyto the analysisof visual art. On the one
hand,they may lead to a betterunderstanding fwhat artistsdo and aspire o do in relation o thereactionsof viewersto their works, and, on the
other, heymayassistartists o executebetterworksin a traditional manner and with the aid ofmachines. n the past few yearsrelationsbetweenart and information heory,with and withouttheaid ofmachines, avebeenstudied o the extent hatnow one can speak of cyberneticaesthetics[2, 3]. In
this article shalldiscuss tsunderlyingonceptsasthey apply o objectsof visual ineart, nparticular,pictures.
II. INFORMATION AND REDUNDANCY
A fundamental artof cybernetic esthetics, ndindeedof cyberneticsn general, s the conceptof
information.t is beyond hescopeof this article odiscuss n detailthe ideaof the statisticalaspectofinformation theory as conceived by ClaudeShannon [4]. Here it is sufficientto say that,mathematicallyefined,nformations a measure f
*Physicist and artist, D-8195 Puppling 40, Pupplinger Au,
near Munich, Federal Republic of Germany. (Based on a
translation of a text in German.) (Received 18 April 1974.)
the complexityof a text, a picture,a system,a
situation, a construction, etc. A quantitativeevaluationof this complexity s the sum of thenumber of elementarysigns used. A practicalquestion s: whatminimumnumberof elementary
signs is necessaryto make a message compre-hensible? Such elementary signs may be, for
example,holes npunchcardsormagnetic potsona magnetictape. They may also be letters andnumeralsn a text, pointsand linesin a telegram,etc.A similarproblem ppearsn colorprinting ndin televisiondisplays.How manymagenta,cyan,yellowand blackpointsdoes one,need to printa
picturencolorthat sfaithful o theoriginal r how
manypointsand linesareneeded oranacceptabletelevisionpicture?Thisconceptof informationhas
provedto be of decisive mportanceor the use of
digital computers and to be helpful in other
scientificdomains, uchas thepsychologyof visualperception.
A distinctionmust be madebetween he amountof information being stored and the rate ofinformationlowing hrougha channel, hatis, theinformation low. The amount of information smeasuredn discretequantities rbits,whereone bitis the unit of information hat allowsa decision obe madebetween woequallyprobablealternatives
only. Information low is measuredn bits/sec.Ineach message there is an essential part andsometimesa superfluouspart, such as repetition.The superfluouspart is called redundancy.n a
picture,redundancys providedby characteristicsof order, for example symmetry, a style of
presentation, tc.
203
8/3/2019 Cybernetic Approach to Aesthetics
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cybernetic-approach-to-aesthetics 3/5
Herbert W. Franke
Some viewers manage to grasp the message in a
picture dealing with a familiar subject when it is
tersely presented, others require a more elaborate
presentation.A graspof the message dependson theamount of objective and subjective knowledgepossessed by a viewer. The amount of informationobtained from a picture by a viewer is a relative
quantity, which varies from person to person.Objective knowledge is the concern of science and
technology, and both objective and subjectiveknowledge of psychology, education [5] and thearts.
III. INFORMATION PSYCHOLOGY
I wish now to discuss information reception andthe thinking process from the viewpoint ofinformation or data processing. A rudimentaryunderstandingof something of a complex character
may be reachedby consideringa simplifiedmodel ofthe way the brain obtains and deals withinformation. The
following stages are involved (cf.Fig. 1): (1) perceptual organs, (2) neuron network,(3) conciousness, (4) short-term memory and (5)long-termmemory.The last threestages involve the
storage of information, and consciousness is alsothe memory processing stage. Short-term memoryprovides storage for a few hours and long-termmemory for an unlimitedperiod. Some informationcan reach either memory stage without goingthroughconsciousness (subliminalperception),andmuch information never reaches long-termmemory.
Experiments indicate that the human brain is
capable of receivinginformation through the sensesat the rate of about 108 bits/sec [6, 7] but that,consciously, only about 16 bits/sec can be received.
During its transmission to the neuron network ofthe brain, information received by the sense
receptors undergoes processing to suppress thatwhich is unimportant, to select that which is
important and to clarify that which is selected as
important.In cyberneticterms,consciousnessmay be viewed
as the temporary storage of information. The
storage limit of about 160 bits in the consciousnesscomes from the fact that information is admitted at
a rate of about 16 bits/sec and is retained for about10 sec. Information retention in the consciousnesscan be prolonged by concentration, but theinformation inflow is blocked when this is done [8,9].
IV. ARTIST-PUBLIC INTERACTION
The purpose of the arts (painting, sculpture,literature, music, dancing, film, etc.) is to offeraestheticsatisfaction to the public. However, artists
generallyproducetheirworks to give satisfaction tothemselves. In the cybernetic model proposed, the
expectations of the public are given priority and Ishall introduce into the model the concept ofaestheticperception,whichcan be discussedusefullyin terms of information psychology.
The question arises as to whether aesthetic
perception differs fromordinaryperception.
I shallassume that both kinds of perception involve thesame processes of information reception and
thinking,but that in artworksthe information to betransmitted is structuredin a special manner. It isstructured with the intention to entice persons toconcern themselves with it profoundly and
repeatedlyduring long periodsof time. This impliesthat artworks should be capable of holding a
person's attention and be adapted to humanaesthetic perception abilities and to exploratorybehavior characteristics.
For this task, the limitsof informationprocessingof consciousness should be taken into account. A
temporal artwork (music, theatre, film, kinetic art,etc.) that conveys 16 bits/sec of information
requires for a grasp of the information by theconsciousness its full capacity. For static works, aviewercan regulate the speed at which informationin the picture or sculptureis received. A still objectthat contains 160 bits of information to be graspedat one short viewing requiresthe consciousness tofunction at its full capacity of retaining bits ofinformation for about 10 sec.
V. THE QUESTION OF EMOTIONS
How may the emotional effects produced by anartwork be taken account of in a cyberneticaesthetics model? In the cyberneticsense, emotionsare consciousness-awakening signals that directattention to situations of importance for dailyexistence. Feelings often operate as feedback
processes. Feelings may be reinforcedpositively or
negatively to maintain or avoid a certain state orsituation.
The feelings with which psychologists are oftenconcernedare those of hunger,fear, aggression,etc.
Recently, the feelings involved in exploration
behavior have been studied, notably by D. E.Berlyne [10]. Some of these serve to stimulaterational behavior. In such studies, a subject selectsfrom the flow of information from the environmentthose bits that areinterestingandunderstandableor
puzzling. Here, three kinds of reactions are
important: boredom, if the flow of information istoo low (below 16 bits/sec); irritation, if it is too
high (above 16 bits/sec); and a positive feeling of
interest, if it corresponds to the human limit of
Fig. 1. Diagram of theflow of information rom the sense organs to the brain.
204
8/3/2019 Cybernetic Approach to Aesthetics
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cybernetic-approach-to-aesthetics 4/5
A CyberneticApproachto Aesthetics
receptivity(16 bits/sec). On the basis of the above, a
new guideline for making artworks can be
proposed: artists should provide a flow of
information of about 16bits/sec. If this is done, one
might expect feelings to be stimulated that areassociated with beauty, harmony, etc.
VI. AESTHETIC STRATEGIES FORPRODUCING A PICTURE
Traditionally, pictures are expected to retain the
interest of viewers over a long span of time;
masterpieces are said to be 'eternally' interesting.But, the.16bits/sec-160 bits rule,cited in Part III, isnot directly applicable to the making of pictures,because a picture containing only 160 bits ofinformation would maintain interest for only 10seconds (and one containing more than 160 bitswould probably be irritating).What is a way out ofthis dilemma?
A humanbeing is able to concentrate successivelyon several categories of meaning in a picture. For
instance, as regards syntax, one may give attentionto the geometrical aspects of the composition or to
the arrangement of colors, etc., and, as regardssemantics, one may consider the meaning of shapesand signs from the points of view of their historical,
metaphorical and allegorical significance and oftheir meaning in terms of one's life experience.Therefore,one way out of the dilemma is to make a
picture in which the amount of information in each
category does not exceed 160 bits and to increase
the number ofcategories,
so that it will takelongerfor viewers to explore the picture, that is, to
maintain an interestin it. Interestcan be augmented
by introducing relationships between the infor-
mation contained in the various categories of
meaning. In this way, a picturecan have more than
160 bits of information without overtaxing viewers.
A second tactic would involve the encoding of asemantic content (an idea, a statement, a geometri-cal rule, etc.). The interest of viewers would then be
stimulated by the search for hidden information as
in a puzzle. A third tactic would be to introduce
signs and symbols that evoke feelings by associ-
ation. This approach has its dangers,exemplified byobjects described as 'kitsch'.
I can now propose a 'cyberneticdefinition' of an
artwork: it is an offer to provide people with
satisfaction through aesthetic perception. It should
be optimally structured and adapted to providethem with long-term interest. Furthermore, it
should give to them a maximum of positivereinforcement of feelings arising from explorativebehavior, leading to the satisfaction of havinglearned some new objective information.
VII. CONCLUDING REMARKS
A goal of cybernetic aesthetics is to provide amore objectivemeansof evaluatingthe effectivenessof artworks. My discussion of the cyberneticmodel
indicates that this is difficult-first, because themeasurement of the amount-of information in anartwork is not easy, although possible in principle,and second, because it is necessaryto take accountof elusive subjective information. Furthermore,aesthetic perception is not absolute but varies from
person to person. Nevertheless, when an attempt ismade to evaluate an artwork objectively, the
strategy and tactics used by its artist must beconsidered.
Actually, the determination of the intrinsic valueof an artwork is of secondary importance. The
primaryissue to be confronted is the interaction ofart and society. Some of the questions that still begfor an answer are: what should be the role of art in
advanced-technology societies? To whom shouldart be directed-the young, the general public or an
art-sophisticated elite? Should there be educationfor art appreciation in school years and beyond?Should art be produced by machines? Is there a
biologicalbasis for art? Is art dead or does it have a
future?I believe that cybernetic aesthetics can help to
answer these questions. It is based on the recognized
explorative behavior of humans and on the premisethat artworksoffer satisfaction through the exerciseof aesthetic perception of complex structures and
signs and of the meanings expressed by thesestructuresand signs. The developmentof cyberneticaestheticshas only begun;many aspects of it remainto be resolved. Nevertheless, I believe that it will
help to put an end to the era of sophistry in
discussions of art. Readers of Leonardo will find
other discussions of a scientificapproach
toaesthetics in Refs. 11-20.
REFERENCES
1. M. J. Apter, Cyberneticsand Art, Leonardo2, 257 (1969).2. H. W. Franke and G. Jager, ApparativeKunst (Cologne:
DuMont Schauberg, 1973).3. H. W Franke, Phanomen Kunst (Cologne: DuMont
Schauberg, 1974).4. C. E. Shannon and W. Weaver, The Mathematical Theory
of Communication (Urbana, Ill.: Univ. of Illinois Press,
1949).5. F. v. Cube, Kybernetische Grundlagendes Lernens und
Lehrens(2nd ed.)(Stuttgart:
Klett,1968).6. K. Steinbuch, Automat und Mensch (4th ed.) (Berlin:
Springer, 1971).7. H. Zemanek, Elementare Informationstheorie (Vienna:
Oldenbourg, 1959).8. H. Frank, Grundlagenproblemeder Informationsiisthetik
und erste Anwendung auf die Mime Pure. (Dissertation,Technische Universitat Stuttgart, 1959).
9. H. Frank, ea., Informationspsychologie5th ed.) (Frankfurtam Main: Umschau, 1965).
10. D. E. Berlyne, Curiosity and Exploration, Science 153, 25
(1966).11. M. Thompson, Computer Art: A Visual Model for the
Modular Pictures of Manuel Barbadillo, Leonardo5, 219
(1972).12. F. Molnar, ExperimentalAesthetics or the Science of Art,
Leonardo7,
23(1974).13. M. Thompson, Intelligent Computers and Visual Artists,
Leonardo7, 227 (1974).14. J. Gips and G. Stiny, An Investigation of Algorithmic
Aesthetics, Leonardo8, 213 (1975).
205
8/3/2019 Cybernetic Approach to Aesthetics
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cybernetic-approach-to-aesthetics 5/5
Herbert W. Franke
15. M. Thompson, Comments on the Algorithmic Aesthetic
System of James Gips and George Stiny, Leonardo8, 326
(1975).16. J. J. Gibson, Pickford and the Failure of Experimental
Aesthetics, Leonardo8, 319 (1975).17. D. E. Noble, On the Application of Systems Models to
Visual Art Based upon My Experience as a Painter,Leonardo8, 278 (1975).
18. R. W. Pickford, Gibson and the Success of ExperimentalAesthetics, Leonardo9, 56 (1976).
19. M. J. Apter, Can Computers Be Programmed to
Appreciate Art? Leonardo10, 17 (1977).
20. D. E. Berlyne, Psychological Aesthetics, Speculative and
Scientific, Leonardo10, 56 (1977).
206