BOOK REVIEW Ahna R. Girshick The psychology of art and the evolution of the conscious brain by Robert L. Solso, MIT Press, 2004 Published online: 27 September 2005 Ó Springer-Verlag London Limited 2005 What is it about an artist’s brain that allows it to capture the sublime essence of a starry night on a canvas sheet? Or enables a painting to invoke such rich sensuous experiences in a museum visitor? Why does appreciation of art seem to be uniquely human? In The psychology of art and the evolution of the conscious brain (MIT Press, 2004), Robert L. Solso described these phenomena as fortuitous by-products of the evolution of conscious- ness. Art is experienced as beautiful (or unsightly) for the same reason that the brain has evolved to signal food as delicious, sex as pleasurable, and a smile as an agreeable expression. Human consciousness evolved over thousands of years for the purposes of survival and adaptability in a changing world. Survival is dependent on seeking safety in response to a scent or sound before a face-to-face encounter; as such, there are obvious evolutionary advantages to being able to imagine a predator before it is seen. Solso’s thesis is that the development of a brain that can create internal representations, independent of physical stimuli, is a prerequisite for art. This idea is believable and attractive, because art is representational in nature, and its conceptualization and appreciation rests on an ability to imagine. Solso examines the evolution of the human brain and the rise of art over the last 4 million years. Early mi- metic behavior allowed the refinement of many skills, leading about 60,000 years ago to the rise of a con- sciousness capable of abstract thought. Tool-making was an important mechanism through which imagined internal representations were transformed into external objects. Early tools were generally utilitarian instru- ments but increasingly showed beautiful craftsmanship. Items of personal decoration have been unearthed and dated to at least 40,000 years ago. A cave at La Sou- quette in southwest France, dated to 30,000 years ago, contains more than 300 stunningly beautiful, undeniably artistic, animal paintings. While Solso successfully argues that a brain that is capable of abstract mental representations and skills to create external objects is a prerequisite for art, a repre- sentation is not necessarily art. Solso tries, less success- fully here, to extend his main thesis to show how consciousness not only led to internal and external representations, but also to art. Reactions to environ- mental stimuli were initially tied to survival needs, but gradually acquired secondary valences. Good food was no longer just appetizing, it became delicious (while bad food was no longer inedible, it became repulsive). Emotions and the ability to empathize with another’s feelings were highly important to the socialization of the species. And an increasing facility for language enabled expressive symbolisms and metaphors. Solso suggests that as humans became more conscious, they also had more time for pleasure, creativity, and art. While this is all intuitively plausible, Solso fails to convincingly demonstrate what transformed representations into art. No one would dispute that highly conscious humans created the La Souquette cave paintings. But this and many other fascinating examples provide only anecdotal support for Solso’s appealing thesis. He evaded investi- gating the essence of art in the context of the evolution of consciousness. For example, he could have argued that art is the aesthetically pleasing subset of all per- ceptually acceptable mappings between an object’s mental and physical representations. For those who assume that bigger brains are better or more adaptable, Solso is clear that the course of evolu- tion meanders due to chance reactions to a changing planet. As remarkable as consciousness is, there is no evidence that it was planned. And the dark side of our complex brains is a propensity for neuroses, psychoses, and autism—not to mention designing weapons of mass destruction. While Solso leaves it at that, it reminds us of the popular speculation concerning the link between creativity and madness. Do the dark features of con- sciousness enable an acceleration or facilitation of A. R. Girshick UC Berkeley, 360 Minor Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA E-mail: ahna@berkeley.edu Pattern Anal Applic (2005) 8: 256–257 DOI 10.1007/s10044-005-0005-7