GESTALT USES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE:
WEAVING A UNIVERSAL PERSPECTIVE
Submitted to Marco Deyasi
In Partial Fulfillment for Art 508, Sec 1
Philosophy and Art
Art Department University of Idaho
The major contention I would like to establish in this work is how gestalt, when
used affectively, is a more reliable connective psychological tool in visual communication
then the psychoanalytical approach that has dominated aesthetics over the past century.
Gestalt has become the guiding influence in my work as well as in my teaching. It
is critical not only in terms of its practical design application to my work, but in my
understanding of what defines visual communication and teaching pedagogy as well; what
has become for me a psychology of connectedness. I feel that it is within most, if not all,
student or viewers to reason through a set of stimuli and diagnose a logical individually
Many of Gestalt theories lay in direct conflict to the psychoanalytical approach to
aesthetics, which emphasizes an emotional nexus as the focus of aesthetic evaluation. This
approach has dominated the field of art criticism as well as production in recent times and
has, I feel, led artist away from the effective potential of their image making.
Gestalt is perhaps summed up best by Max Werthheimer’s quote that the
fundamental “formula” of Gestalt theory might be expressed in this way: “there are
wholes, the behavior of which is not determined by that of their individual elements, but
where the part-processes are themselves determined by the intrinsic nature of the whole. It
is the hope of gestalt theory to determine the nature of such wholes.” 1
Through it’s basic premise of constructing a universal experiential aesthetic Gestalt
allows for me a broader sense of the importance of the artist in human existence.
We are the keepers of dialogue, our role as both mirror and interpreter make us the
guardians of human experience. It is through these theories and shared experience that I
am able to look back retrospectively through the history of art and see why it is that I have
felt connection to a particular number of works by others, and in turn borrowed aspects of
their solutions in an attempt to express a similar human story.
While my ability to fully comprehend the full potential of gestalt theory on my
work and teaching is not complete, it has been instrumental in my thinking about how, and
ultimately why, I, and my students produce art.
“Much more than mere perception, an image of humanity attaches to ordered
Perception. We perceive the bounty afforded by some things and the lack missing
In others.” 2
The psychological theory of Gestalt began in Germany in the early 1900’s. It is
derived from investigations in psychology, logic, and epistemology. Gestalt has evolved
into a mixture of existential philosophy, phenomenology, holism, humanism, orthodox and
interpersonal psychoanalysis, and Eastern philosophies. It was developed by a group of
German psychologist most notable Max Wertheimer, Kurt Koffka, Wolfgang Kohler, and
Christian von Ehrenfels. Gestalt theory can be traced back to the romantic humanism ideas
of Spinoza. Harvard professor Rudolf Arnheim the leading expert on Gestalt and its
influences on art writes how “ Spinozistic was the notion that order and wisdom are not
imposed upon nature but are inherent in nature itself; of great interest also was Spinoza’s
idea that mental and physical existence are aspects of one and the same reality and
therefore reflections of each other.” 3It can then be asserted that in the Gestalt view the
human mind and nature are bound by the laws of order, and that by applying this notion
there can exist a cohesive effective approach to visual communication.
Even in it’s infancy the influence of perception of external stimuli on a
psychological interpretation was evident. In 1890, Christian von Erenfels publish his paper
entitled “On Gestalt Qualities” where he pointed to the fact that a piece of music can still
be recognized even when played in different keys, or when notes where left out. This led
to his argument that “if a melody and the notes that comprise it are so independent, that a
whole is not simply the sum of its parts, but a synergistic whole effect, or gestalt”. 4
In a similar effect on a visual form of this theory Max Wertheimer, who studied
under Erenfels, experimented with the ideas of a motion picture in which he used a
zoetrope to view a single framed image in a running series much like a flipbook (Fig. 1). It
was Werthheimer’s assumption that when viewed in sequence, continuously, these single
images would combine to affect a common narrative. Rather a quant notion nowadays
considering advances in film technology, yet somewhat ground breaking in the later half of
the nineteenth century. These early works demonstrated that an individual organizes
his/her perceptions into meaningful sets. This principle of perception became a basic
concept in Gestalt Theory. These experiences with perception have influenced other
theorist and psychologist to link the potential of Gestalt theory to many other fields
including linguistics, art therapy, musicology, instructional design, human computer
interaction, architectural design, and visual communication. 5
It was after the establishment of Werthheimer’s “apparent movement” theory based
on the illusion of motion pictures, and the subsequent five-year period at the Psychological
Institute in Frankfurt further investigating his theory, that he met with psychologists Kurt
Koffka and Wolfgang Kohler to form the nucleus of gestalt theory.
In 1923 Werthheimer published the “Theory of Form”, which became known as
the dot essay because it was illustrated with abstract patterns of dots and lines.
Werthheimer concluded in the work that certain gestalts are enhanced by our innate
tendency to constellate, or to see as “belonging together” elements that look alike (called
“Similarity grouping”), are close together (“proximity grouping”) or have structural
economy (“good continuation”). 6 That such tendencies are inborn, not learned, is
suggested by the cross-cultural effectiveness of sleight-of-hand magic and camouflage,
both of which work by subverting the laws described in Wertheimer’s paper. But the
interplay of such grouping tendencies is far from simple, because: (1) as the effective of
simultaneous contrast demonstrates, the appearance of parts is determined by wholes; (2)
judgments about similarity or proximity are always comparative; and (3) in compositions
as intricate as paintings, posters and page layouts, parts may be purposely made to connect
by one grouping tendency (similarity of color, for example, or differences of shape, size or
Many artist where directly influenced by these assertions including Vasily
Kandinsky and Piet Modrian. One artist who was directly influences by Werthheimer’s dot
essay was Paul Klee, who attended Werthheimer lectures and used some of its diagrams in
his paintings in the 1930’s (fig.2). 8 Most other artist have become familiar with
Werthheimer’s laws of visual organization through the two important texts: Language of
Vision (1944) by Gyorgy Kepes, and Art and Visual perception: A Psychology of the
Creative Eye (1954) by Rudolf Arnheim. It is Rudolf Arnheim who has had the most
lasting influence. Arnheim, a German immigrant, has published 13 works on gestalt theory
and art also became professor of the Psychology of Art at Harvard University.
The Gestalt Psychology of Art
If we are to understand Rudolph Arnheims approach to gestalt aesthetics we must
first apply a definition of Psychology and it’s aims as well as look to how the gestalt
aesthetic method attempts to segregate itself from a psychoanalytical approach to
It is Arnheim’s contention that if the psychology of art is to hold itself to a
scientific definition it must then have at its disposal methods of perception that are
scientifically arguable. This scientific reasoning is what Arnhiem’s points to as a
shortcoming in the psychoanalytical aesthetic model.
According to Ian Verstegen “What Arnheim would object to is a somewhat naïve
epistemological idea common to many psychoanalytic treatments that sees unconscious
drives as working blindly without feedback from the environment. Furthermore, Arnheim
has been disappointed with the inability of most psychoanalysis to respond to the greatness
of works of art”. 9 Over the past half a century or more it is this psychoanalytical model of
perceiving aesthetics through the unconscious that has dominated approaches to not only
production, critical observation and analysis as well. Although the definition of
psychoanalysis has changed from its Freudian roots it still continues to emerge from the
same epistemological standpoint and is thus not an effective scientific method to be used it
Because Gestalt psychology attempts to explain many aspects of meaningful
perception at an elementary level, it promises to serve as an important fundamental level of
analysis. If, as Arnheim argued many years ago, “a round form represents for a child
‘thingness,’ it cannot be interpreted as representing some other idea that psychologists
might like to foist upon the child”. 10 Without a psychology sensitive to such factors, the
speculative psychologist as Verstegen sees it “will operate at a level of generality that is
too great to exhaust certain formal characteristics of the work that are necessary to dispense
with before further speculation is possible”. 11
If we now view the Arnhiem model of Gestalt as a perceptual model of
understanding it then has the advantage of not only demonstrating how the work of artist
can be dissected through design, it additionally presents us now with a contextual
framework for understanding the psychological emotional connectivity the work shares
with those who view it.
Gestalt theory represents what is seen as a weaving of realism and the formative
power of the human mind. Views stressing native abilities of rationalism along with the
importance of unlearned abilities and the sufficiency of stimulation for perception and
thought. This tying together of cognitive theories allows the gestalt model to demonstrate
how the viewer is able to intuitively accumulate sensory information in a given space and
then infer through reasoning a connective psychological thread.
A distinction exists her where the psychoanalytical approach which would view a
psychological response to these stimuli as emotive. The Gestalt view is a more cognitively
rational approach. Seeing the emotional response as an individualist experiential reflexive
response. Gestalt is thus universal not individual.
Emotion and Cognitive Connection
To perceive insight into the internal character of a work through its outside
appearance and to then access an emotional origin is something Gestaltists have tried to
circumvent. The thing that Arnheim implied is that “metaphor is not birthed out of this
physiognomic perception rather the insight is derived out of metaphor built on structures
inherently in place in our psychological pre-constructs”. 12
For the Gestaltist there exists a structural connection of the senses that allows for a
unified frame of response when confronted with stimuli. This response is then cognitively
related to past experience and a qualitative metaphoric response is then registered. The
ensuing emotional response is then an individualized metaphorical reaction. This effected
response takes place at a level of abstracted cognitive reasoning where two perceptual
images are combined to form meaning. This structural metaphoric reference taken from
stimuli according to Arnheim “portrays things which are at a higher level of abstractness
than is the symbol itself”. 13
In this metacognitive approach Arnheim is attempting to weave together the ability
of the senses to contain universal or abstract information, along with the minds ability to
manipulate images for productive thinking. Arnheim is relating the two by saying that
“individual mental impressions, or our collective sense datum, already contain abstract
content.” 14 Through an engineered dissection of the symbols within a work of art the artist
and in turn the viewer are engaged in the task of problem solving for the act of creation as
well as interpretation. Arnheim pointed to this assertion in one of his pivotal works
“Perceptual Abstraction and Art”.
In asserting that perceiving has at its nature an abstracting sense Arnheim is predating what
is now taken for granted in Cognitive Psychology. In “Perceptual Abstraction and Art”
Arnheim considered the “intelligence” of the senses and asserted, through the gestalt theory
of pragnanz how this cognitive act takes place. The law of pragnanz is the fundamental
principle of gestalt perception, which says that we tend to order our experience in a manner
that is regular, orderly, symmetric, and simple. It is this that allows gestalt theory to take
care of abstraction because it provides us with a structural framework with which the mind
can economically organize stimuli, it creates the ability to hold many examples under one
rubric. As Arnheim says “all perception is the perceiving of qualities, and since all
qualities are generic, perception always refers to generic qualities.” 15
Reception and Interpretation
What role then does how the viewer receives a work of art lead to an understanding
of interpretation in the Gestalt psychology of art? Gestaltists tried over the years to
describe the ways in which we see images differently because of our built experiential
framework yet similarly due to the nature of gestalt. What Arnheim suggested is that
because of the relativity of perception, “probably only a further shift of the reality level is
needed to make the Picassos, the Bracques, or the Klees look exactly like the things they
represent”. 16 What he was trying to say is that these artists and the way in which there
work has been received is based on our innate ability to organize rationally all the given
information and then contextually reason through it.
This produces a functional approach to artist’s and art as well as interpretation.
What can be garnered from this approach is that art can be interpreted with the idea that
when all information is accumulated there is a unified level of reasoning that is universal
Defining Gestalt Design
It is important to first address the physical vocabulary of Gestalt Design in order to
better understand its uses and effects on the psychology of the viewer.
Historically artist and designers using gestalt theory have focused on a handful of
perceptual laws to improve their effectiveness of image. Gestalt psychologist have
attempted to discover refinements of the law of pragnanz, these laws are theoretically used
to allow us to predict the interpretations of sensation, these are often called “gestalt laws”
They include proximity, similarity, continuity, closure, and equilibrium. It is important to
keep in mind that each principle does not operate independently but always works in
concert with every one of the others.
Proximity: What is closest together unites. Elements that are near to one another join
together to form patterns or “groupings,” figures against the ground (fig.3). 17
Similarity: Visual elements that resemble another in some way (form or shape, size, color,
direction) unite to form a homogeneous group figure. Modern psychologists believe that
the orientation-or slope-of lines are the major factor in similarity grouping (fig.4). 18
Continuity: Perceptual organization tends to move in one direction; thus we can follow the
path of a single line (or contour) even in a maze of many overlapping lines (fig.5).
Closure: We possess an innate tendency to close gaps and to make wholes. The result is
more visually stable. When we can achieve this, we are both physically and
psychologically rewarded. Things feel in harmony. If edges, contours, or masses are not
joined, our brain may connect them together if it can find evidence of continuation. The
fewer the interruptions or discontinuities, the more likely closure will occur. Such “closed”
areas are readily seen as a figure. Closure is a confirmation by the brain of a preexisting
idea; it is not a verification of knowledge (fig.6). 19
Equilibrium: (Balance and orientation). Every visual field tends toward excellence or
precision-completeness-just as all physical activity is directed toward attaining physical
balance or achieving equity in opposing forces. The idea is reflected in the ancient Chinese
concept of the yin and the yang. Psychologically, we are very uncomfortable-sometimes
frightened-by anything perceived to be out of balance whether or not it is something we are
experiencing physically or perceiving visually. It is a condition that we will not tolerate for
very long. Nature strives for the most regular organization possible. Evidence of this may
be observed in a water droplet; stretched out as it starts, it gradually changes to a spherical
form as it falls. Our visual perception conforms to this concept. We prefer or are attracted
to, figures that exhibit the fewest alternative modes of organization. The brain tends to see
the stimulus as more correct than it really is by mentally altering the configuration of any
figure-object or thought perceived to fit (the simplest interpretation). It is a process of
stereotyping or model making. We assume that objects viewed have a regular organization
Assimilation: This is a process by which a meaningful impression obtained by any one or
more of the senses are related to the vast storehouse of past experience and knowledge.
Assimilation is responsible for a characteristic that psychologist call “isomorphic
correspondence.” This is the relationship between the appearance of a visual form and a
comparable response in human behavior. We know the glowing hot coils on an electric
stove will burn us; we will recoil and shout at a small child about to touch them. We can
feel the hurt. Seeing an image of broken glass or of sharp thorns may cause most viewers
to shiver. We are reminded of a previous uncomfortable experience with these and respond
emotionally to the visual image. The image-sometimes the mere thought-of a gun or a
knife disturbs some persons because the function of guns and knives is well understood. In
the arts, isomorphic correspondence is an especially valuable concept. When the correct
groundwork is laid, the emotional response may be very strong (fig.8). 21
The first work I have chosen to isolate for this paper is Christina’s World by
Andrew Wyeth (fig.9). It has become for me an important example of effective use of the
laws of gestalt. It is my hope that my work will at some level achieve a similar form of
gestalt and create a connective thread with the viewer.
Through Wyeth’s use of proximity we can see the connectivity of actors in the
scene. The triangulation of Christina the house and the emotion of the scene are set in
motion through both this proximity or lack there-of. It becomes a play of the emotional
weight of distance. We as the viewer use the closure of a fixed line of Christina’s gaze to
become both Christina as well as Christina’s longing. Through assimilation we feel the
wind and temperature, the texture of the land under our skin the ache of her bones. It is a
perfect example of how the gestalt pragnanz can effect emotional connection.
I have used a similar approach in my recent figurative works based on my children
and their disabilities (fig.10). I am attempting for the same kind of triangulation between
the viewer, subject, and object. The walker or crutch (object) serves as a visual cue,
through closure or assimilation, to represent separation or difference with viewer. The
proximity or physical relationships between viewer and subject, subject and object, are
intended to help create tension; back to viewer head turned in shame. The Gestalt set in
Wyeth shared a similar sense of aesthetics with Edward hopper, whom I also
admire and have used as inspiration. In May of 1967 upon hearing of Hoppers death
“Even though Hopper wasn’t painting much, the fact that he was alive and still
thinking….He never lost the large grasp, never got mixed up in a lot of picky young
theories that don’t mean anything. The strange dignity of Hopper’s people and the way he
has stripped everything away till there was nothing, till you are filling nothingness with
emotion. He ended up painting a corner of a vacant room and a patch of sun. The whole
world in a shaft of light”. 22
Hopper use of isolated figures within a field is something I have incorporated in my
figurative works. Through a lack of proximity of figures and the ensuing affect of
unbalanced viewer equilibrium Hopper is able to connect with an emotional response to
our feeling of aloneness. Through assimilation we feel the quite in an image like Automate
where we become in part, through pragnanz, the lone contemplative figure (fig.12). I have
also focused on solitary figures in my narrative works in hopes of creating a similar effect
of isolation and separation. My hope is that the viewer will feel, as we do with Hopper, a
sense of connection and quiet melancholy through Gestalt (fig.13).
Another artists whose work I have been drawn to is Frida Kahlo. I have always
been attracted to the Two Fridas in particular (fig.14). The use of object as metaphor is
essential In Kahlo’s work as well as my own. The closure at work in the piece connects the
physical with the metaphysical and becomes one of its strongest tools. We connect through
similarity that the figures are the same. At the same time the offset of equilibrium allows
for a tension in the figures dissimilarity. The bleeding heart in it’s fragile state, connecting
through a common line the figures eternally struggle of identity, give to us the ability to see
how closure can enable metaphor to serve as a narrative strand.
An additional artist whose work with object as metaphor that has been inspirational
to me is Renee Magritte. I have been impressed with the effectiveness of two of the laws
in particular. In a work like Son of Man Magritte has emphasized through proximity the
relationship between the apple and the face of the businessman (fig.15). In doing so he is
able to challenge human assumptions about the unknown. There is tension that is created
for the viewer with a loss of continuity and equilibrium in what is otherwise a “normal”
existence, this tension is what I have been trying to mimic in my recent Will series.
In this recent Will series I have tried to employ a similar use of object as metaphor.
The series is based on readings of Carlos Castaneda a historic anthropologist doing work in
the late 60’s based on the use of psychotropic drugs for medicinal use. The series is based
in particular on the Yaqui Indian belief that there are places on the human body where life
forces emanate, in this case will. In the work the transparent lines become metaphor for
what is at times partially or completely unseen. Similar to the Two Fridahs and the conflict
of identity I want the idea of struggle of will to be hinted at by the physical evidence while
at the same time creating questions of causality in the viewer. I wanted to disrupt the
equilibrium by placing an unexpected object within a normalized figurative environment
causing a Magrettesque challenge of the assumed unknown (fig.16).
In the landscape monotype series I have been extensively working on I have been
trying to imitate various gestalt tools I have observed throughout the work of the
impressionist. It is their application methods that are most important in terms of effective
use of gestalt. In particular the work of Monet and Cezanne have most impacted my work.
In both artists work there exists the profound use of similarity and closure. In Monet’s
Ruen Cathedral series the viewer is meant to see structure through subtle changes in light
and value, in actuality the surface is a blinding abstraction of dabs of paint, yet for the
viewer it becomes a sublime affect of color and the definition is physical reality (fig.17).
Through closure we are allowed to see the world our experiences tell us exist. In
Cezanne’s work we can apply the same understanding with a more simplified yet effective
approach in use of gestalt. His work challenges the viewer even more to use closure and
similarity to identify object and subject yet the results are no less apparent. In the work he
is able to coax the viewer into a relationship of perception. We view and recognize the
information, make association through the senses, and the magic is kept alive (fig.18).
There have been additional artist whose work has used similar effects that have
extended my understanding of this form of Gestalt. The work of Richard Schmidt and
Russell Chatham have had influence on my work as well, each accomplishes, through
different routs of execution, to do what the earlier impressionist works have done to
connect the viewer to the scene. In particular I have used the abstract edge quality of
Richard Schmid to push the boundaries of the closure of realism through abstraction
(fig.19). This occurs in the work of Chatham as well, his ability to blur the edges of
subject, control subtleties of tone, and blur the line of realism have been of particular
importance in my work (fig.20).
I have tried in these landscapes to use elements of both the impressionists as well as
the modern landscape artist to produce a hybrid mixture of sensibilities heavily routed in
the same practices. My aim has been to use effects similar to the artists mentioned to
engage the viewer in the play of experience and psychology of art through the principles of
gestalt. I have tried to implement an abstract sense through brush work like that of
Cezanne or Monet adding marks of color and tone each combining to become sky, land,
structure (fig.21). I have played around with abstract edges to balance the boarder between
abstraction and realism like Schmidt, and controlled tone and subject edge similar to
Chatham, to blur the separation between what is perceived as actual and what our innate
gestalt implies (fig.22).
Implications for Teaching
The Gestalt principles have many applications in the field of education. I have tried
to weave its influences throughout my productive, as well as theoretical, curriculum at the
secondary and collegiate level.
My aim has always been to encourage the native inherent abilities in students to
make connection through what is not given. “There’s to need to beat the viewer over the
head with your purpose you might as well paint arrows” is a typical expression students
have heard over the years. It has always been my intent to teach them to engage the viewer
in a dialogue of common experience. “Allow the viewer to become an active member in
the dissection of what you set in motion, let them finish your equation.” At the same time I
am pushing for use of pragnanz in design, I am coaxing a realization of connection through
aesthetic evaluation of historical works. “See the process be the process.”
My hope has always been that when our time together is finished the students leave
with at least an initial understanding and appreciation for the connective threads of gestalt.
While not existing in the mainstream of conceptual aesthetics Gestalt for me is the
philosophical cornerstone of my productive life. It has woven itself into my conscious
beliefs on what art and educational pedagogy should be. I am a pragmatist. While I
understand the philosophical stance of the modernist aesthetic, I feel it has somehow
focused attention on that which is perpetually functionally, irrelevant. Not that questions
of the subconscious shouldn’t be asked, but perhaps we shouldn’t continue to expect an
answer. Even for Freud sometimes a “cigar is just a cigar”.
“What happens when a problem is solved, when one suddenly “sees the point”?
Common as this experience is, we seek in vain for it in the textbooks of psychology. Of
things arid, poor, and inessential there is an abundance, but that which really matters is
missing. Instead we are told of formation of concepts, of abstraction and
generalization, of class concepts and judgments, perhaps of associations, creative
fantasy, intuitions, talents-anything but an answer to our original problem. And what
are these last words but names for the problem? Where are the penetrating answers?
Psychology is replete with terms of great potentiality-personality, essence, intuition,
and the rest. But when one seeks to grasp their concrete content, such terms fail.”23
Arnheim, R., Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye.
Berkeley California: University of California Press, 1954, revised 1974.
Arnheim, R., New Essays on the Psychology of Art; Perceptual Abstraction and
Art. Berkeley California: University of California Press, 1986.
Arnheim, R., Visual Thinking. Berkeley California: University of California Press,
Ash, M., Gestalt Psychology in German Culture: Holism and the Quest for Objectivity.
Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Graham Lisa., “Gestalt Theory in Interactive Media Design”, Journal of
Humanities and Social Sciences, 1, no 2, 2005.
Marianne Teuber “Blue Night by Paul Klee: Vision and Artifact” Henle M., ed.,
New York: Springer, 1976.
Richard Meryman., Andrew Wyeth: A Secret Life. Harper Collins Publishers. 1998.
Meyers, J, F,, The Language of Visual Art; Perception as a Basis for Design.
Dryden Press: Saunders College Press, 1989.
Verstegen, I., Gestalt and Art; A Psychological Theory. Vienna: Springer, 2005.
Wertheimer, M., “Gestalt Theory”, translation in a Source Book of
Gestalt Psychology. Ed. Willis, D. Ellis. New York: Harcourt Brace and
Max Wertheimer., “Gestalt Theory”, translation in a Source Book of
Gestalt Psychology. Ed. Willis, D. Ellis. (New York: Harcourt Brace and
Co., 1938), 1.
Ian Verstegen., Gestalt and Art; A Psychological Theory. (Vienna: Springer, 2005), 2.
Rudolf Arnheim., Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. (Berkeley
California: University of California Press, 1954, revised 1974), 37.
Mitchell Ash., Gestalt Psychology in German Culture: Holism and the Quest for Objectivity.
(Cambridge University Press, 1998), 88.
Lisa Graham., “Gestalt Theory in Interactive Media Design”, Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences, 1, no 2, (2005), 1.
Max Wertheimer., “Gestalt Theory”, Translation in a Source Book of Gestalt Psychology. Ed.
Willis, D. Ellis. (New York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1938), 1.
(Wertheimer 1938, 2)
Marianne Teuber “Blue Night by Paul Klee: Vision and Artifact” Henle M., ed.,New York:
(Verstegen 2005, 9)
(Verstegen 2005, 10)
(Verstegen 2005, 10)
Rudolph Arnheim., New Essays on the Psychology of Art; Perceptual Abstraction and Art.
Berkeley California: University of California Press, (1986), 36.
(Arnheim 1986, 37)
(Arnheim 1986, 38)
(Arnheim 1986, 38)
Rudolph Arnheim., Visual Thinking. Berkeley California: University of California Press, (1969),
Jack Meyers, F,, The Language of Visual Art; Perception as a Basis for Design. Dryden Press:
Saunders College Press, (1989), 54.
(Meyers 1989, 23)
(Meyers 1989, 24)
(Meyers 1989, 25)
(Meyers 1989, 26)
Richard Meryman., Andrew Wyeth: A Secret Life. Harper Collins Publishers. (1998), 394.
(Wertheimer 1938, 1)
Circa 1900’s Figure 2……………………………………….
1938 Figure 3……………………………………….
Proximity Figure 4……………………………………….