Art, Attention, and Consciousness: An Experiment in Experiential Painting



Ben Drewry and Johannes Kohler

Altered States Conference 2005

Abstract: A “transformation of perception” is investigated by looking both at the interrelationship between art, attention and consciousness and by looking into their common origin. An example is developed that highlights a deep connection between art and attention. After this example is expanded upon, the role attention plays in consciousness is considered. A new model of consciousness is overviewed that claims that attention is the primary factor in creating consciousness, and posits a prereflective self prior to all perceptual experience. This is compared to states of pure consciousness described by Eastern sages, and the role attention plays in achieving those states is examined. Our experiment in experiential painting is described, and we then attempt to tie together the three main topics.

Key Words: art, attention, consciousness, prereflective consciousness, experiential art, abstract painting

Introduction

Through what process is art created and experienced? What is the nature of the looking at the origin of an artwork, not as an object or a thing in itself, but as the entirety of “its” unfolding within consciousness? Could such a looking expose a deeper process that gives light to consciousness itself? Here we will explore the interrelationship between art, attention, and consciousness.

We will show how attention plays a primary role both in the creation and experience of a work of art. We will start with the definition of art as that which represents ones consciousness, and by using an example, observe how and why one represents it.
After expanding upon this example, we will turn to the role attention plays in consciousness. We will take a brief overview of a recent theory of consciousness in which attention plays a primary explanative role. This theory seeks no less than to solve the "hard problem" (Chalmers 1995) of consciousness by using a model based on cognitive science and incorporates a prereflective state of consciousness.

With a wider perspective on the role attention plays both in consciousness and art in general, we will then describe our experiment in experiential painting and highlight some of its experiential qualities.
Through our painting experiment, we hope to intuitively grasp what is involved in the experience of art and to speculate on what this experience can mean for experience and perception in general. It is our view that in order for a "transformation of perception" to take place, one should begin with understanding, or rather intuitively realizing, the origin of perception itself, which upon realizing, allows transformation to emerge.

Art and Attention

What leads one to create a work of art? If we consider art to be a representation 1 (in whatever form) of our consciousness (including subconsciousness), where does the need to represent it come from? To engage an example, imagine someone who in the middle of her daily routine, passes by a pile of rocks 2. Each day she walks by, barely noticing or paying attention to the rocks. If she does happen to glance at them while in the middle of thoughts such as planning for the next day, contemplating what to eat for lunch, or even pondering her own existence, her perception of the rocks is instantly matched to her preconceived notion of rocks. This occurs either consciously or subconsciously without entering her mind as an object of experience 3.

Occasionally, as she passes by the rocks, some of their particular features catch her attention (this is only a way of speaking). She notices their form, shading, texture, symmetry and other subtle features. Some of these features subtly enter into her relative notion of rocks and she begins to recognize how these features change over time. She may even realize how her perception of these features and the experience of the rocks in general vary depending on her changing mood. However, such experiences do not move beyond her relative notion of rocks, as the specific pile of rocks continually falls under her relative notion of them, even if gradually modifying or expanding it.

Then, on one particularly illuminated day, and at a moment when the subject has lost herself amongst the path, a pure light penetrates the atmosphere, and a glimmer of it is reflected off one of the rocks and “catches” her attention. She stops in her tracks, and the scene of the rocks overwhelms her. She becomes fully engaged with the rocks, noticing their existence as never before. They seem to come alive, in fact it is as if her very life is “lived” through the rocks. Instantly, the experience transcends her relative notion of rocks and she cherishes the experience 4.

Having such an overwhelming experience, she feels compelled to communicate it to others. Realizing the impossibility of interpreting such an experience through words (except possibly through poetry in which she is unacquainted), she brings others to the site of the rocks, summarizes her experience, and asks them to look at the rocks. They all appear to be dumbfounded by what they see, for they see only rocks. Some, possibly out of pity, catch a glimpse of what she was trying to convey, but the majority perceive the rocks as ordinary, for they remain within their preconceived notions of them.

After giving up trying to share her experience by pointing to the rocks themselves, her inner experience and human need to communicate (this is a presumption beyond this article) converge, and compel her to represent her state of consciousness (retention of the object) 5 in a way that others can themselves enter into relation with, as a part of their own subjective experience. A manifested representation of her consciousness is created in the form of a painting. Many, upon paying attention to the painting, convey understanding and seem to similarly grasp her original inner state of mind. Clearly this is not a reflection of her experience, but, in so far as her work of art is a representation of her consciousness (however limited or fragmented a representation), it is communicated to the others to the extent in which they attend to it, thus becoming a part of their own consciousness.

Each singular subject comes to view the artwork in his or her own way, as their preconceived notions and variations in the way they perceive (color blindness, poor eyesight, etc), lie prior to/within their own looking. Some, in a state of heightened attention, loose awareness of their preconceived notions of rocks, as their experience of time even fades into the background of awareness, and through this experience, their consciousness has been changed. In the experience, their relative notion of rocks is transcended, and either subtly or explicitly, the experience changes the way they perceive all rocks from that moment on 6.

Yet, many of her fellow observers are threatened by the new experience. Their preconceived notions of rocks (and the proper way to interpret/represent them) are particularly strong, engrained in their mind from years, possibly even millennia, of experience. When their perception of the work of art does not match their previous perceptions of rocks, a perceptual mismatch takes over their minds and fear results (Hayward 1984). To the extent their attention “enters” the work of art, is the extent in which their fear becomes more vivid, and thus aversion towards it is increased. Outwardly, some attempt to solidify their previous notion of rocks while others simply let their experience of rocks become dull as they become apathetic to any experience of rocks.

For both however, the original experience of the work of art still inwardly exists and conflict is created from opposing the perception of what is outside with the deeper experience lying dormant inside. This conflict can only come to an end through an acceptance of all their experience of rocks, and to do this they may have to abandon all their notions of rocks, and in so doing they may once again experience rocks in a real and “lively” way.

Now, let’s take this example of the interplay between art and attention, along with the “cycle” that unfolds through consciousness as a result, and extend each variable in it as far as possible. To do so, we should for the moment, attempt to suspend as much as possible all our preconceived notions of art and the “limits” to perception and conscious experience in general, in order that we may creatively enter into it.

So for the subject who originally experiences the object, we can replace with any perceiving subject or interconnected group of perceiving subjects.

The perceived “object” can be seen as any perceptible object existing in a continuum (that of space-time) through which all possible perceptions “exist”. The perceived “object” can also represent the extension of our perceptual experience within inner mental space (concepts, emotions, etc.).

The subject’s level of attention (or awareness) can also be seen as a continuum, the beginning of which lies the experience (consciousness in the broad sense) of the most subtle of perceptions, for example "subliminal perceptions" (Ramsøy and Overgaard 2004), or the "residual phenomentality” of consciousness (Mangan 2001) 7. One such faint perception from the non-sensory “fringe” of consciousness is the “feeling of familiarity” that is often translated as the “feeling-of-knowing” that lies “at the heart of cognition in consciousness” (Mangan 2001). This is only one of any number of such “feelings” that unify together in the manifold of space-time and extend the arising of the individual ‘I’ experience over time. To try to “fitter out” and label all of these background “feelings” would clearly be an exercise in futility, as they represent recognitions of cognition beyond normal levels of perception. Further, the attempt to communicate such in conceptual frameworks would only “dilute” them or may even help to conceal them.

From this, attention extends into an entire spectrum of conscious reflection, the “object” of such as that which was considered above. Moreover, we will also view the level of attention as the quality of reflection, which can proceed from our everyday habituated level of awareness, to vivid aesthetic or inner spiritual levels of awareness.

One should note that in the above description of the act of observation, those that had a particularly vivid experience of the painting experienced a reduced sense of time. Therefore, we will add to our conception of the subject’s level of attention the experience of time. All reflections are temporally extended, and here we will posit that in vivid aesthetic or spiritual experience, the more vivid the experience is, the more the experience of time is reduced as a background phenomenon of consciousness. The concept of time here can not only represent experiential time, but also chronological time, such as subconscious memories or instincts that affect the way an “object” is perceived or represented in advance. The most habituated experience would then be that which is most extended in time, either as a part of the subject’s experience or extending through past levels of instinct and conditioning within the organism. The vivid aesthetic or spiritual experience would be that in which time is reduced both experientially and chronologically, for in the act of direct perception one increasingly disassociates from past instincts and conditioning including the temporally extended concept of what they are experiencing.

As for the creation of a work of art, we will combine the continuum of the subject’s level of attention, with that of the continuum of perceptible “objects”, to form a matrix of experience in which the subject(s), experiencing a “part” of, may then represent in material form. This form is limited by the practical and physical constraints of matter in general. The representation is a form of communication even if just one of reflexivity with oneself 8. In fact, in the process of materializing the representation, a process of feedback exists, usually subconsciously, between the material form and the mental “object” until what is produced “matches”, in whatever degree, with one’s mental “object”.

The range of communication can be in all matters of human life, and beyond to the outer reaches of knowledge and experience. It is limited by the practical and physical constraints of matter, as well as the receptivity (level of attention) of other subjects.
We will let this “extension” of the original example resonate with the reader, rather then going into some of the infinite possibilities it may represent within human life. As an illustration, one could begin with the most “objective” level of reality and the principles of such, and then extend the reach of the imagination to the most subjective aesthetic or spiritual experience and the relating of such 9.

Let's return to the original example of the subject and the rocks. She could have stopped at any moment and made a drawing of the rocks, or simply taken a picture of them. She could have been motivated by many different reasons to do so, each based on external or internal predetermined or preconceived levels of behavior. Yet, without having any prior internal or external motivation, she was driven to express herself (make a representation of her consciousness) by the experience itself. Thus, as the experience freed her from her external and internal habitual patterns, the possibility to represent her experience in a free way opened up to her 10.

Instead of making a painting she could have simply put a rope around the rocks and called it art. Regardless of the validity of her claim, it would most likely not help in communicating her inner experience, which was what drove her to communicate in the first place. The form she used was not necessarily the one that best represented the rocks as a visual experience, but the one that could best communicate her inner experience of them.

Notice that she entered into this heightened experience when she “lost herself amongst the path”. This represents an openness of attention due to a decreased identification with individual thought patterns. Further, this is continued in the retention (continuation) of her experience in which the act of creating takes place. For in order to “accurately” represent her state, she must attentively observe her continuing mental processes, separate from whatever preconceptions she may have in regards to that experience. Finally, for those observing her painting, they too must attentively enter into their own mental processes apart from their preconceptions in order to grasp, even if in part, the original experience of the artist.

Now suppose she becomes aware of this process. She attentively observes it through herself and intuitively grasps the example put above. The experience is similar to her vivid experience of the rocks and she is driven once again to communicate her experience.

How is she to communicate this? She first tries to represent her experience by cataloging everything she knows about her environment, including her response to it as well as her involvement within it. In the process of doing so, she collects vast amounts of representations, yet she remains unsatisfied because she has no way of putting them together into a single coherent experience. She then looks to the way she represents in itself, and with insight into such, she becomes aware of her own knowing. Yet her representations are still fragmented leaving her with no experience that fully integrates all of her representations.

Finally, she turns in the opposite direction, to the experience itself. Upon realizing the role attention plays in the entire process, she attends her own attention. And through introspection, she finds a prereflective awareness that lies prior to all her perceptual experience, and this is where we will turn to next as well.

Attention and Consciousness

The problem of consciousness (at least as modern science is concerned) has been an elusive one. The "hard problem" was put fourth by Chalmers (1995) as the simple fact that we have conscious experience yet we do not know how to account for it. Materialists give functional or reductive answers, while others simply attempt to prove its insolvability, yet there has been no consensual answer (see Block et al. (1997) for relevant literature).

Varela (1996) called for a new approach when he coined the term "neurophenomenology" to describe a shift in the way consciousness should be studied. He proposed using both a rigorous phenomenological method along with modern cognitive science, related through a system of "mutual constraints", in order to eventually “dissolve” the hard problem of consciousness. Latter, this shift in epistemological study was declared to be a fundamental shift comparable to that of Darwinism (Bitbol 2002).

This method has now laid the groundwork for broad new studies in consciousness. In a recent review by Taylor (2005), he proposes that attention is "the gateway to consciousness". He uses a single control model to map the movement of attention and the model works for both bottom up control (glimmer of light), and top down control (searching for a friend in a crowd). Though these are examples for vision, his model applies to other sensing modalities as well as to motor operations.

Through the execution of his model, working memory buffers are created, and “gaps” emerge within consciousness as content free experience. He claims that these “gaps” are the result of a prereflective self and leads to the conscious experience of ownership, which is the “error free ‘I’ experience” that is ever present within consciousness.

The ‘I’ experience is best described here by Husserl:

When I say I, I grasp myself in a simple reflection. But this self-experience [Selbsterfahrung] is like every experience [Erfahrung], and in particular every perception, a mere directing myself towards something that was already there for me, that was already conscious, but not thematically experienced, not noticed. (Husserl 1973, 492-493)

Therefore we can only reflect on ourselves, yet when we have the experience of pain for instance, we have the continuous feeling that it is our experience. According to Taylor, he solves this problem by introducing a prereflective self, at the center of all perceptual experience, as an integral part of his model of consciousness.

Further, he claims that this prereflective self can be experienced in heightened states of awareness in which the subject “attends his own attention”. He cites studies of subjects meditating which relate both phenomenological observations with data from various types of brain imaging that support the claim of an experience of pure consciousness (prereflective self) during the period of meditation. (Taylor 2002)

Accounts of pure consciousness have been around for thousands of years as an essential part of many Eastern religious traditions. Around the third century before Christ, an Indian sage named Patanjali compiled religious texts called Yoga Sūtras. They consist of short passages guiding one on the inner journey towards pure consciousness. Below is a passage that strikingly resonates with what we have been considering:

… The mind itself is always experienced because it is witnessed by the unchanging Self.

The mind does not shine by its own light. It too is an object, illuminated by the Self.

Not being self-luminous, the mind cannot be aware of its object and itself at the same time.

Nor is the mind illuminated by another more subtle mind, for that would imply the absurdity of an infinite series of minds, and the resulting confusion of memories

… And the mind, despite its countless tendencies, exists for the sake of the Self, because it is dependant upon it. (Pantanjali 18-24)

Further, the Sūtras describe a process of increasing levels of attention from the “gross” level of “mental absorption”, to a state in which “the mind is quiet enough to be absorbed in the object of attention”. In this state, the “object of attention is subtle” and the “range of subtle objects includes all the levels of creation”. As the light of the Self shines forth, “consciousness perceives only the truth”. Finally, when even the subtlest level of mind is transcended, and the mind becomes perfectly still, the “unbounded Consciousness of the Self – alone remains”. (Pantanjali 41-51)

Not only is attention a primary factor in creating consciousness, it can also be used in realizing consciousness. For in training ones attention onto attention itself, one may realize a pure consciousness that lies implicit yet unrecognized within all of experience.

If we are to take this extended account of attention and apply it to the “matrix of experience” from which a subject forms a representation, a new ground emerges. It is the ground of prereflective or pure awareness, which lies at the center of experience, providing the “gap” between each attended moment of consciousness.

This consciousness has no object of reflection, thus it is not extended in time and can be viewed as eternal. Being timeless, it completes our vision of the “matrix of experience” in that the vivid aesthetic or spiritual experience eventually reaches a timeless state that simultaneously turns out to be its origin.

Now, if our attending to each “object” whether of external or internal perception becomes a more vivid experience as the awareness of time is reduced, are we intuitively glimpsing not only the subtle mental processes at work (recognition of symmetry, color, perspective, etc.), but also the ground of all experiencing itself? What kind of art, if any, could make this “apparent” to oneself?

Experiential Painting

Hegel claimed that traditional art no longer served the "highest needs of the human spirit". Although he did not conceive of the non-image abstract art of today in saying so, it could be argued that his philosophical history of art, which leads towards greater abstraction in artistic representation, is a precursor to this modern development. (Pippin 2002)

While Hegel had in mind a greater reflexivity in the way art is represented, such as paintings about “paintingness”, he could not have imagined the moment in time we are in today where we have begun to reflect on our aesthetical experience both by rigorous phenomenological methods and by the expanding field of cognitive science.

As Noë (2000, 2002) has pointed out, art can assist us in phenomenological study by engaging ourselves in our perceptual consciousness. He primarily used examples of modern sculpture to propose a theory of engagement in which an "enactive" approach to temporally extended perceptual experience is to be developed. However, it is clear that attention plays a key role in his theory as well: "the painter must attend ... the way the scene looks" (Noë 2002 his emphasis) and "one must direct ones attention to the temporally extended fully embodied and environmentally situated activity of exploration of the environment" (Noë 2000).

He argues against phenomenological introspection by stating, "phenomenological study of experience is not an exercise in introspection, it is an act of attentiveness to what one does in exploring the world" (Noë 2000). If we are to consider the broad view we took above for the role attention plays in consciousness, the same process would be occurring in attending a visual scene, attending the exploration of an environment (a combination of both motor function and sense modalities), and attending to ones own consciousness (introspection). Although each of these may consist in different “objects” of attention and extend through different parts of the brain, the underlying process would be the same. Therefore, we will accept his view of phenomenological study as one of temporarily extended events, but we will also inquire into introspection, as it is our purpose here to probe the phenomenological aspects of art to see if it can lead to a greater awareness not only of temporally extended phenomenogical experience, but of consciousness itself.

The idea for our experiment began with a reflection. While in the process of painting an abstract painting similar to that of Jackson Pollock 11, the entire process was observed and we found it difficult to designate a point when the painting was finished 12. More importantly, upon paying close attention to the process, we noticed that the painting seemed to contain more meaning in its entirety as it unfolded in time rather then what was “left over” when it was deemed complete.

Reflecting on this, we decided to film the painting process. We used two digital cameras, one on a tripod, the other hand held to capture dynamic shots of the painting. No reference points were filmed (i.e. frame of the painting, hand or brush), as we wanted to capture only the painting itself.

One of us would paint a portion, and then the other would film it at different angles with various dynamic movements. We then would repeat the process stopping to film about every fifteen minuets. After repeating this a dozen times or so, we concluded by tearing the painting apart, setting it on fire, and filming it as it burned. The film was then edited and self-produced electronic music was thematically added.

In the experience of creating our experiment, there was no “outcome” of representation in our minds. While paying attention to the fact that each “step” of the painting was going to be filmed, every use of paint was a fully present movement, in and for itself. Our minds were fully concentrated on the present moment, for the present moment was what was being recorded.

What eventually emerged was a detailed abstract structure with apparent symmetries and correlations of color. The emergent patterns could be viewed as a generative order explicating the implicate orders of our minds (Bohm 1980). Bohm and Peat (1987) describe the process of painting beginning with a “general idea, a feeling that contains, in a tacit or enfolded way, the whole essence of the final work”.

Yet, whatever emergent structure or pattern came to life, it was only in the background of our attention, as we were focused not on the development of form, but on the attending to each moment.

Such attention demanded an inward looking that could penetrate the layers of self, for the temporal functions of the mind only extended and diluted the present moment that we were attempting to represent. This is not to claim that such functioning did not exist at the time, or that it didn’t affect the painting, but it only existed as a residual experience “outlining” the greater movement of the present moment.

With this attention, the actual physical activity of painting became effortless. The separation between the painting and ourselves was fully penetrated, as the expanded space of mind enveloped the entire process.

Now what remains of it? Dispersed ashes of paper, and bits of information are all that’s left. However, we should not focus our attention on these remains, but rather the experience of viewing the unfolding of the painting within consciousness as the images are received from a viewing screen. This can only be fully experienced in that from which it came, the present moment.

One may simply perceive it as moving images on a television screen. Or look at it is an interesting array of colors and patterns that please the eye. They could label it as some kind of new form of abstract art, pick out some features that appeal to them, attempt to analyze or ignore the rest, and be done with it.

However, without deeply attending to the experience, not only as visual information received from the screen, but as the entirety of the unfolding process within ones consciousness, one may be entertained or inwardly satisfied, but no “transformation of perception” will occur.

Let’s take a look for a moment at the beginning, middle and end of the experience. From a blank screen, an image materializes and the experience begins. Sound waves vibrate through the atmosphere of the viewing space, drawing one in to pay attention to all the vibrations around them.

The middle is the “flow” of the film, brining the painting to life, not as a linear series of images, but as an amorphous entity within consciousness in which the “observer”, between the images and sounds, the screen and the eyes, even the space between each photon and sound wave, exists as Pure Consciousness.

In the end, the sound is compressed into a single tone and fades away, the screen fades to black, and the “observer” is left with nothing but the inner workings of their own mind.



Conclusion

It is not our purpose here to create a hierarchical definition of art or to somehow classify art purely by the transformative experience it may produce. Art is inherently indefinable and the range of meanings that it generates is endless. One needs only to look at the cultural and developmental necessities of all varieties of art, and representations of consciousness in general, to appreciate its various forms. No doubt, it is by fulfilling these necessities that we are able to communicate the broad range of our shared experience.

Throughout history, humanity has used particular forms to represent the entire spectrum of conscious experience. Some forms of art correlated to the emerging understanding generated from man’s inherent and expanding ability to reflect. Often, these forms of art reflected in abstract ways an understanding of our world just prior to similar understandings based on science. (See Shlain (1991) for examples)

Now, we are in a time when our understanding has delved into the depths of quantum reality and expanded outward to chart the vastness of our Universe. The greatest temporally extended event conceivable, the beginning of our Universe, in which the forces of nature were undivided, is theoretically reflected upon and “observed” through the use of high speed atom colliders. With such knowledge, there have even been so called “Theories of Everything” proposed that are awaiting the missing observations and concepts that will make them complete.

Theories of consciousness are emerging that may one day create fully working models of consciousness that could even be used to create artificially intelligent computers. The interest and human effort in which both our outer and inner realms are reflected on increases as our perceptive capabilities through the use of instruments expands exponentially.

Suppose these theories come to light. What is art to be when both the Universe and our minds are fully understood and predictable? Clearly, to contact once again the unknown through an experience that transcends our conceptions, art must look to the origin. That is what we have proposed here and have attempted to manifest through our experiment in painting.

The realization may emerge that no matter what one directs their attention to whether it be a “Theory of Everything” or a work of art, one is continuing a processes of becoming that has removed oneself from the inner Self or State of Pure Consciousness. This State is one in which the “matrix of experience” is fully penetrated and truly unitary perception comes to life as the subject-object duality is transcended, leaving That perceiving That. Inner time ends as the Source contacts itself in a spontaneous Recognition of Self.

Ultimately, the experience of rocks in the original example represents the inner Self, inherent in each act of perception, and the artist represents the collective consciousness of mankind. The only question left is, “how do you perceive rocks?”