Last Saturday Genevieve, Gabi, and I decided to explore more of the city, and embrace the Parisian lifestyle. In the late morning we walked to the local patisserie and fromagerie to pick up cheese and baguettes for a picnic. We did a quick google search for a new park to explore, and were on our way to Champs-Elysees Garden. After strolling around the park and eating our lunch we decided to check out the two museums: the Grand Palais and the Petit Palais.
At the Grand Palais the exhibit Artists and Robots was being displayed. The whole theme of the museum was centered around how art and technology are intertwined. At the entrance to the exhibit there are a few questions posed that I reflected on as I walked through the museum.
The Questions:
- What can a robot do that an artist cannot?
- If it has an artificial intelligence, does a robot have an imagination?
- What is a work of art?
As I looked at the art made by the machines I began to think about how if I wasn’t told some of these art pieces were created by machines I wouldn’t have known they were. To my eye, it seemed as if most of the actual pieces could have been created by humans. This led me to wonder about the connection between the artist (potentially robotic), art, and the viewer.
There have been multiple studies done on “mirror neurons” which are neurons which are activated for first and third-person experience of motor actions and emotions. So, when we see another person, neuronal activity and pathways are activated in the same ways as if we were performing the action ourselves. More recent studies have drawn the link between these mirror neurons and art (Piechowski-Jozwiak, Boller, and Bogousslavsky, 2017).
There is a proposed mechanism that encompasses stimulation of actions, emotions, and bodily sensations which works as the basic frame of aesthetic response to art – even visual art (Freederberg, and Gallese, 2007). Further studies show an induction of empathetic response in the art receiver/observer which ignites the simulation of respective motor program based on the visible creation marks. These marks would match the artist’s goal directed movements and hence would activate corresponding areas of the art receiver’s brain as part of the ‘embodied simulation’(Piechowski-Jozwiak, Boller, and Bogousslavsky, 2017).
So, from these mirror neurons there could be a connection built between the artist and the viewer, as they connect to the emotions of the piece. I wonder if this connection will always be lost with the “robot artist”, as they are not able to produce the same emotions.
References
Freedberg, D.; Gallese, V., (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends Cogn. Sci., 11: 197–203.
Piechowski-Jozwiak B., Boller F., and Bogousslavsky J., (2017), Universal Connection through Art: Role of Mirror Neurons in Art Production and Reception. Behavioral sciences, 7(29): 1-9.