Origins of Materials and Processes by John Delmonte (review)

into account p\>choanalysispro\ idcs tlic only explanation. but this assertion is never supported by argument or evidence. There is also some looseness in argument: for cxamplc within a few pages transitional objects are seen asparadigmatic of our relationshipto artworks, as prpcur.sor.s o l this relationship. and as arc~/ietypi,.\of artworks. Some more serious questions also nag me. How is a psychoanalytical account to be distinguished from. say. ii piece ofcriticism?Is it a form of criticisni or is it intended to follow Freud in providing a scicntific account'?If the latter. how is it t o be tested'? I do not think that the author gives these questions sulficient attention. It is instructive to notc that the test which she is applying t o the adequacy of her own model seems t o be that o f a sense of fittingness. Several examples of this can be noted in her discussion of Object Relations theory as an account of aesthetic appreciation: descriptions of such experience "resonate with . . .are suggestive 0 1 . . .recall . . .have obvious connections with . . ." statenicntsmade in psychoanalytical theory.That such analogies can be detected by the author in selected passages seems t o me ii very weak test of the assertion that Object Relations theory provides a better account of aesthetic experience than alternativepsychoanalytical approaches,not to mention rival psychological theories. However, for the reader who seeks a short. comprehensive and contemporary review 0 1 psychoanalytical perspectives on art. i t can be found in this book. Left Side, Right Side: A Review of Laterality Research. Alan Beaton. Yale llniversity Press. New Haven & London. 1986. 364 pp. Cloth. S22.50. ISBN: 0-300-03.549-7. Re\,iewed by Sean O'Driscoll. Irish International Artr Centre. Ca\tle Matrix. Rathkeale. Co. Limerick. Ireland. Studies upon the differences between the two sides of the brain shcmld be o r special interest to I.cwwrcto reader\. concerned as they are with the interaction of the sciences and the arts. C'arl Jung clearly identified the two types of human thinking. directed and non-directed, Ions before the \upporting neurobiological evidence was documented. Directed thinking appeared to berelated mostly to Western civilizations where factual. written words dominated, whereas non-directed thinking was related more to the seeminglyirrational. sometimesintuitive, non-verbal symbolism which was more common in the East. Finally. in 1962, just after Jung's death. Dr. Sperry and his colleagues published their celebrated papers which demonstrated that these two type\ o f thinking were related to clear neurobiological differences in function between the left and right cerebral hemispheres. Until the end of thc ninetccnth century, the field ofsymbolism appeared t o be the exclusive domain of artists. painters. \culptors. writers, and architects. However. Jung showed us that not only are we living in a world of symbols, but that a world of symbols lives within us. Thus. the study of symbolism involves not only the arts but aiso most sciences, notably psychology. psychiatry. neurology. anatomy. and biology. Symbolism seminars conducted in recent years at the Irish International Arts Centre have unearthed interesting contributions from other hitherto relatively unrelated fields including archaeology, philosophy, mythology, l~olkloie. tlle(1logv. ctllnology. ctyln0lI)gy. philology. astrology. alchemy. cosmology. and numismatics. Practically all fields of knowledge have symbolic connections. Ihriiig the past two decades of research and study on the subject. it was imperative. but understandably difficult. to keep abreast ofthe latest research on this biological key to symbolism: research into the laterality of the human brain. Alan Beaton has comc to thc rescue with an authoritative overview which draws together the major issues and findings in a form readily usable by both students and researchers. Beaton's review ofthe whole ofthe literaturc on the \ubjcct is especially relevant t o those who have read only popular accounts of leftright differences in the human brain: some popular explanations ;ire totally inisleading. For example. one of the most popular and widely circulated books places the 'symbolic' mode in the let" hemisphere. Current studies appear t o indicate thecontrary.and thisseems to be confirmed by recent .Japanese research well summarized in this book. Studies of Japanese patients who had undergone brain surgery indicate...