Written by: Erin Chin 2008

Looking into the Void: Negative Space and Neuroscience

 

“To develop a complete mind, study the science of art, study the art of science. Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.”

 Leonardo Da Vinci (1452–1519)

 

“It is not exactly the presence of a thing but rather the absence of it that becomes the cause and impulse for creative motivation.”
Alexander Archipenko (1887-1964)

 

Negative space and Right brained/left handedness both have been used in cultures and language to denote the meaning of bad or immoral.  Unfortunately these biases still persist in today’s “politically correct” society and don’t seem to be becoming popular anytime soon (schools still enforce right handedness and are very left hemisphere oriented).  But what is meant by right brained or negative space?  It has become quite known that the two hemispheres of the brain, the right and the left bridged by the neural tissue called the corpus callosum, are better at some functions than others.  The left brain is believed to be better at verbal, analytic, temporal, and linear functions, often called left brain functions; while the right brain functions lean towards spatial, holistic, synthetic and analogical functions.  We are taught to use, and even value, our left brain functions more than the right brain functions in school and later in life.  Negative space is the space between objects.  The negative space forms its own shapes, but these unique shapes are usually ignored and not even noticed.

However, not all people buy into these biases.  In the Japanese art tradition, this empty space is called ma, which is expressed as a valuable space, not worthless.  Artists of all medium from sculpture to photography spend years training and enhancing their right brain functions and ability to manipulate negative space.  Because of this intense focus on the “bad” aspects of reality, they have been able to create art that takes a common object, say a pencil, and recreate the pencil in a way that allows non-artists to perceive the object with new found attention and perception.  That is art, the ability to recreate reality from a different perception, which is enhanced by the manipulation of space by the artist’s right brained enhanced focus.  Nonetheless, no matter how stunning the art is, it is still just the end result, while the process of creating that art is the most intriguing.

Artists of many mediums often balance space in their works.  Positive space, negative space, and even format space all are important factors for the layout and overall composition of a piece of artwork.  For a better understanding of how these artists manipulate space, an understanding of the different types of spaces is required.  Positive and negative spaces are dependently connected.  Positive space is the space the objects possess while negative space is the space surrounding the objects.  Both positive and negative spaces are further defined by the format or the edges of the medium that contain both the positive and negative space respectfully (however, in sculpture, format is not applicable making negative space nearly indefinable). 

Most people can point out, or “see” positive space and the format (the easiest is when the art is in a frame).  Negative space is another matter.  To the untrained eye the negative space isn’t there.  They don’t “see” the shapes made up by negative space.  Let’s take a simple example, say a stool against a white wall.  Most people when they try to draw what they see, try to outline the stool.  They don’t see the shapes the gaps between the legs and the wall make.  Therefore, they are only drawing consciously half of what they see, that is, only the stool and not the wall.  Without the wall there to add contrast to the stool though, the stool wouldn’t be seen to begin with, because it would blend into the background and wouldn’t be stool anymore.  So technically they are drawing both the wall and the stool, but only trained artists are consciously aware of it.  The artists due to this awareness can therefore manipulate this space to enhance their pieces.   

In Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards, her goal is to teach people to “see” or to become aware of what they actually perceive, in this case negative space.  In the beginning, she uses the analogy of a puzzle to demonstrate how positive and negative spaces are contrasting variables that are defined by the other variable.  If each object is it’s own puzzle piece and the background made up of the other pieces, than the line (also known as contour) connecting each piece that is formed when the puzzle is constructed shows that all the objects, or positive space, are connected to each other through that line, and that the background, or negative space, are shapes as well.  She continues later on to help visualize (for only if it can be visualized can it become conscious and therefore used) negative space with the common cartoon image of Bugs Bunny.  When Bugs Bunny runs through a door, the door becomes the negative space and the hole that is left in the space of the rabbit is the positive space.  There is no rabbit in the door, but can be inferred by the silhouette supplied by the door.  Negative space does the same thing, when negative space is the object of choice, the shapes and angles of the negative space are highlighted and the “empty” space left behind gives the shape of the positive spaced objects. 

Another way to make the negative space easier to see consciously is to make the object white and the background black in a white and black picture.  For instance, the famous face/vase picture illusion is a good example.  If the vase is black, the vase stands out and only after a great deal of concentration can the faces be perceived.  Now, if the vase becomes white, the faces become more obvious than the vase.  The secret to the illusion is the fact that the negative space actually creates a shape that can be recognized by the left brain that can give the shape symbolism and a verbal name.  Many teachers use these face/vase drawings to teach students to become consciously aware of the negative space, which is basically changing your perspective.  Artists have a different perspective of what they observe which they can change at will, while the rest are use to just one perspective of seeing, and that is usually with the left brain functions.  Many visual illusions implement the ability to change perspective of one object or drawing.

Every form of art manipulates negative space: 2-D (like painting, drawing, and even photography), 3-D (sculpture) and music.   Take Leonardo Da Vinci’s “Vitruvian Man” for example.  This piece of 2-D artwork is ideal in showing how the artist manipulates the positive space, the negative space, and even format space to balance the composition of the piece.  First, the positive space of the eight legged man is what people see right away.  However, the negative space and formatting give the piece its appeal.  In this example the format and the negative space actually compete for dominance of the observer’s attention.  The format is both the circle and the square, but the man is only trapped within the square and where the circle cuts into the square.  However, the negative space is not confined to the space between circle and square and pushes the boundary of the format past that area into the rest of the circle and square.  The eye starts off looking at the man, and then is carried out to the edges of the circle, and bottom of the square by the negative space.  Therefore, by manipulating the negative space with the format Da Vinci turns a plain eight legged figure into an intriguing study of the human form. 

Photography uses negative space to give form to the positive space, but also to define the directions the eyes should move while looking at a piece.  For example, Ansel Adams’s “Aspens, Northern New Mexico, 1958” print.  The photograph is of a glad of aspen tree trunks with one distinct tree in the foreground.  The positive space is the all the areas taken up by the tree trunks, the one whole tree and the low shrubs.  The rest of the photography is negative space and the format is the rectangle formed from the dimensions of the print itself.  In this example the shapes formed by the negative space are easily visualized, and there is an equal amount of negative space versus positive space (not always the case).  The shapes of the negative spaces are used to highlight the positive space, and the positive space is like a road map for the eyes.  The positive space intercedes with the format mostly on the top and the bottom of the frame.  This draws the eye to move up and down the picture simulating the head movement and awe of taking in the grandiose of the forest.

The hardest art to appreciate the manipulation of negative space is 3-D art or sculpture, because the format, or frame, of the art is not palpable.  That makes the negative space hard to define into specific shapes due to the large 3-dimensional area the negative space occupies.  For example, Henry Moore’s and Dame Barbara Hepworth’s famous sculptures utilize negative space expertly.  These friends both are known for carving out spaces in their sculptures.  Some say Henry Moore was connecting the rolling landscape with the human figures by cutting out concave rounded segments.  Dame Barbara Hepworth was more consciously aware of the voided spaces in the sculptures and often made observes notice the holes more sharply by stringing cords through the holes.  She was trying to allude to the importance between space and mass.  But, both these sculptors owe credit to the sculptor who first famously manipulated voids, namely Alexander Archipenko.  Alexander Archipenko is known for being a cubist sculptor who introduced voids into his art (among other things).  He studied the relationships between voids and solids (positive and negative space) as well as concave and convex forms turning the cubist’s overlapping planes into 3-D overlapping perspectives from one angle.  The overlapping perspectives are possible, because of the voids.  Other areas of the sculpture that would have been blocked from view are now seen by looking through the voids, and the voids themselves add texture and meaning to the sculpture.  The use of negative space in sculpture allows the observer to not only see defining shapes and silhouettes as in 2-D art, but adds another dimension of perspective of seeing through into the interior of space.  3-D art physically allows negative space to form a tangible shape, paradoxically by being defined by positive space and being empty!

Musical negative space is called silence.  The silences between notes, chords, symphonies, and so on, are just as important to the musical piece as the notes chords and symphonies; and are sometimes even more important.  Musicians use silences for many reasons, but one of the most striking reason is when the silences fool the expectant listener into thinking the piece is over, or even not over when the piece is.  Many pieces have silences between segments and it is always clear if a new listener is in the audience because they start clapping at inappropriate silences.  It is the suspense of surprise created by the composer that keeps people intrigued and to actually listen to the music itself.   However, when the silence is unexpected due to the piece being done that leaves people with the unsettled awareness of the negative space that lasts for a large amount of time.  Maurice Ravel’s piece Bolro ends in such a manner.  Throughout the piece the negative space is vaguely apparent with the repetitiveness of the piece.  But, at the very end the piece abruptly becomes silent, shocking the perception of time and sound onto the forefront of consciousness.  Negative space has suddenly become crystal clear with only echoes of Bolro ringing in the ear. 

Positive space (objects) and format space (edges) to some degree are well understood in neuroscience.  Certain colors, luminance, even illusions of motion and depth trigger certain neurons in specific areas of brain regions.  Even certain edges or lines in certain angles excite specific neurons in the visual cortex.  But without negative space (contrast), those neurons could not be enticed to fire, because edges could not be separated from other spaces.  Therefore, perceiving the negative space is vital to deeply understanding why the neuron fires and not just what causes the neuron to fire.  This understanding might even become more complex with the idea of right brain functions versus left brain functions.  But first, what causes the neurons to fire given a visual stimulation like an edge to begin with?

There are two processes in the visual system: the What and the Where systems.  The What and the Where systems are activated by different stimuli in the environment as well as process the information slightly differently.  The What system is responsible for recognition of objects, color and complex detail.  The Where system is responsible for the “perception of motion, space, position, depth (three-dimensionality), figure/ground segregation, and the overall organization of the visual scene” (Livingstone, pg. 50).   The four ways the two systems differ in processing information are: color selectivity, contrast sensitivity, speed, and acuity or resolution.  The Where system does not pick up color, but the What system does.  The Where system has high contrast sensitivity being able to distinguish slight differences in brightness, while the What system has low contrast sensitivity.  The Where system processes information faster than the What system, but has lower acuity than the What system.  Negative space is mostly the focus of the Where system (relying on contrast sensitivity, spatial segregation, and organization), but the What system can also pick up negative space that the Where system cannot, therefore both influence the perception of negative space.  For instance, when colors are equiluminant the Where system can’t distinguish between the two colors, because the luminances of the colors are equal: or the same gray in a black and white world.  Therefore, only the What system can distinguish the shapes made from the two colors and “sees” negative space (even though the picture shimmers because the Where system plays a major role in determining position, and can’t determine position if it can’t distinguish the shapes).  From an evolutionary stand point, the Where system is more primitive than the What system, therefore the What system is thought to have been an adaption to the Where system for color, complexity and object recognition. 

In the visual system there are two steps for information procession.  The first step involves center/surround cells that are activated when light hits certain areas on the cell (the center or the periphery depending on the type of center/surround cell).  On the cell there are stimulatory areas and an inhibitory areas and the ratio of light hitting the two regions determines if the cell fires or not.  Therefore these cells respond to discontinuities of light or abrupt changes in luminance.  In the What system these type of visual cells are broken down into more specific color activation cells (Type 1 and 2) while the Where system just has black and white center/surround cells.  The second step in the visual system is the detection of edges.  In a famous experiment conducted by David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel, they found that edge detector cells fired when a stimulus was at a certain orientation or angle.  They also realized that the deeper into the visual cortex the cells gradually become more specific for other characteristics like contours, curvature, and corners.  Both steps together form distinct shapes by incorporating both discontinuities of light and the edges of these discontinuities.  Therefore the visual system is designed to incorporate both negative space and positive space which are defined by edges and discontinuity of light.

As mentioned earlier, there are functional differences between the right and left hemispheres of the brain and both play very different roles in vision.  To recap, the left brain is believed to be better at verbal, analytic, temporal, and linear functions; while the right brain functions lean towards spatial, holistic, synthetic and analogical functions.  These sides can be loosely correlated to the What and the Where system.  Therefore, is it possible that one hemisphere actually does process one of the systems more than the other system?  If so, that could explain why the right hemisphere is more spatial and the left hemisphere is more verbal.  Unfortunately, that question is still unsolved. 

Not much more is known about the deeper visual system, but even from the initial stimulation of the three types of visual cells a clear distinction is discerned between spaces in the actual structure of the cells.  The cells themselves have a positive space (the stimulatory area) and a negative space (the inhibitory area).  The deeper into the visual cortex, the more the cells discriminate specific differences.  The basic concept of negative space progresses like the visual cortex into more complex differences like tonal gradients or shading, perception and depth.  These complexities are based on the gradients of space which negative, positive and format initiate, and are constantly being stretched and manipulated by artists.  When the space is manipulated expertly, the visual and auditory imagination is activated too.  This visual imagination is like the ability to compensate for the eye’s blind spot, to be able to perceive motion, to perceive other objects in a piece of art (like Bev Doolittle’s famous camouflage paintings) or even fill in objects that aren’t there.  For example, take the unicorn painting by Nancy Chien-Eriksen.  It is not a true negative space painting because the positive space is not silhouetted, but stretches the concept of space by just painting the shadows of the unicorn.  At face value, the picture is a conglomerate of black shapes.  But the beauty of the piece and the visual system is that the unicorn, the positive and even negative space can be seen in the imagination!  How?  Science doesn’t know exactly.  But artists invisibly draw the spaces by leading the eye with strategic lines spurring the imagination and expectations of the viewer.  Therefore, one piece of art is seen differently each time it is viewed.  When the auditory imagination is activated musical pieces float in the head.  Bolro is a good example of auditory imagination.  At the sudden silence at the end of the piece many people still “hear” the music repeating in their heads.  Musical images, or the music playing in the head, are very common, and composers create such musical hooks purposely.  Sometimes just the name or a couple of notes just need to be heard and the imagination plays it.

What scientists haven’t paid attention to that artists have and understood the importance of, is the connection between negative space and the rest of space.  Maybe it’s because most people aren’t consciously aware of it, but that doesn’t mean it is not important to vision.  Also, maybe because the study of negative space dives into the processes of consciousness, that is also still not understood, that scientists ignore it.  So if scientists want to “see the whole picture” of vision then they must look into the void.  It might start to explain why visual illusions shock people, why people can only see one perspective at once, and who knows, maybe even lead to the admiration and cultivation of the right hemisphere’s view of the world.

Artists use all spaces, especially the ignored negative space, to change our view and our perception of the world, while scientists are studying one space, namely the positive space.  Artists understand that the observer is part of space, makes their own spaces and has influence over space.  People are not just observers who perceive light in one dimension, but all dimensions including time.  Therefore, science’s study of vision is one-sided and has a long way to go before it can understand the multi-perspective visual feast that artists capture and appreciate.

 

References:

Adams, Ansel. “Aspens, Northern New Mexico, 1958.”  Masters of Photography: Ansel Adams. http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/adams/adams_aspens_full.html (Accessed May 3, 2008).

Alexander Archipenko --  Britannica Online Encyclopedia. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9009291/Alexander-Archipenko (Accessed May 4, 2008).

Alexander Archipenko - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Archipenko (Accessed May 4, 2008).

Barbara Hepworth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Hepworth (Accessed May 4, 2008).

Boddy-Evans, Marion. Negative Space -- How Negative Space is Useful in Painting. http://painting.about.com/od/paintingforbeginners/ss/negativespace.htm (Accessed April 8, 2008).

Dame Barbara Hepworth --  Britannica Online Encyclopedia. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9040086/Dame-Barbara-Hepworth (Accessed May 4, 2008).

Da Vinci, Leonardo. “Vitruvian Man.” http://www.success.co.il/knowledge/images/Pillar8-Thought-and-Art-Vitruvian-Man-Leonardo-da-Vinci.jpg (Accessed May 3, 2008).

Delahunt, Michael. ArtLex's Ne-Nz page. http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/Ne.html (Accessed April 8, 2008).

Edwards, Betty. Drawing on the Right side of the Brain. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher, Inc., 1979.South, Helen. Negative Space Drawing - Learn to Use Negative Space. http://drawsketch.about.com/od/learntodraw/ss/negativespace.htm (Accessed April 8, 2008).

Fulks, Michael. Composition, A primer on Positive and negative space. Apogee Photo Magazine. http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag1-3/mag1-3mf1.shtml (Accessed April 8, 2008).

Henry Moore --  Britannica Online Encyclopedia. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9053624/Henry-Moore (Accessed May 3, 2008).

Henry Moore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Moore (Accessed May 3, 2008).

Livingstone, Margaret. Vision and Art: The Biology of Seeing. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2002.

Negative space - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_space (Accessed April 8, 2008).

Sacks, Oliver. Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain. New York: Alfred. A. Knopf, 2007.