A clue, oddly enough, comes from studies in animal behavior, especially the behavior of rats and pigeons that are taught to respond to certain visual images. Imagine a hypothetical experiment in which a rat is being taught to discriminate a rectangle from a square (Figure 7.6). Every time the animal approaches the rectangle, you give it a piece of cheese, but if it goes to the square you don’t. After a few dozen trials, the rat learns that “rectangle = food,” it begins to ignore the square and go toward the rectangle alone. In other words, it now likes the rectangle. But amazingly, if you now show the rat a longer and skinnier rectangle than the one you showed it originally, it actually prefers that rectangle to the original! You may be tempted to say, “Well, that’s a bit silly. Why would the rat actually choose the new rectangle rather than the one you trained it with?” The answer is the rat isn’t being silly at all. It has learned a rule—“rectangularity”—rather than a particular prototype rectangle, so from its point of view, the more rectangular, the better. (By that, one means “the higher the ratio of a longer side to a shorter side, the better.”) The more you emphasize the contrast between the rectangle and the square, the more attractive it is, so when shown the long skinny one the rat thinks, “Wow! What a rectangle.”
This effect is called peak shift because ordinarily when you teach an animal something, its peak response is to the stimulus you trained it with. But if you train the animal to discriminate something (in this case, a rectangle) from something else (the square), the peak response is to a totally new rectangle that is shifted away even further from the square in its rectangularity.
What has peak shift got to do with art? Think of caricatures. As I mentioned in Chapter 2, if you want to draw a caricature of Nixon’s face, you take all those features of Nixon that make his face special and different from the average face, such as his big nose and shaggy eyebrows, and you amplify them. Or to put it differently, you take the mathematical average of all male faces and subtract this average from Nixon’s face, and then amplify the difference. By doing this you have created a picture that’s even more Nixon-like than the original Nixon! In short, you have captured the very essence—the
FIGURE 7.6 Demonstration of the peak shift principle: The rat is taught to prefer the rectangle (2) over the square (1) but then spontaneously prefers the longer, skinnier rectangle (3).
Caricatures and portraits aside, how does this principle apply to other art forms? Take a second look at the goddess Parvati (Figure 7.2a), which conveys the essence of feminine sensuality, poise, charm, and dignity. How does the artist achieve this? A first-pass answer is that he has subtracted the average male form from the average female form and amplified the difference. The net result is a woman with exaggerated breasts and hips and an attenuated hourglass waist: slender yet voluptuous. The fact that she doesn’t look like your average real woman is irrelevant; you like the sculpture just as the rat liked the skinnier rectangle more than the original prototype, saying, in effect, “Wow! What a woman!” But there’s surely more to it than that, otherwise any
Parvati is not merely a sexy babe; she is the very embodiment of feminine perfection—of grace and poise. How does the artist achieve this? He does so by accentuating not merely her breasts and hips but also her feminine posture (formally known as