56 TEACHERs COLLEGE COLUmbIA UNIvERsITy
All In The Timing: Using Embryological Principles To Understand Creative Thinking In Art
Here I emphasize the possibility of generating nov-
elty by modifying the creative process itself, in terms
of how ideas are elaborated. I propose as such a
candidate mechanism the principle of “ontogenetic
heterochrony,” a biological term describing how
profound differences in the morphology of organ-
isms can arise from small changes in the timing of
developmental events (Gould, 1977). One biological
example involves the profound morphological and
cognitive differences between humans and chim-
panzees—despite a 99% overlap in DNA—that arise
through the relative retardation of certain devel-
opmental processes in humans. Another is that of
Galápagos finches, whose highly varied beak mor-
phologies result not from a large number of genetic
differences, but rather from small variability in the
timing of one “switch,” a segment of DNA that con-
trols the activity of other genes (Abzhanov, Protas,
Grant, Grant, & Tabin, 2004).
Baseline depictive heuristics
comprising artists’ schemata
What does this have to do with visual art? I
believe that domains like drawing and painting
represent an ideal forum for the application of onto-
genetic heterochrony. Activity in these domains
is well-structured, with constraints from artistic
media, from motoric movements, and from non-
accidental aspects of depiction that partake of the
basic operation of the visual system. Artists can
be observed rendering, with the emerging work
emerging before one’s eyes, and substantial pro-
cess traces are often evident in finished artworks.
Ontogenetic heterochrony can be best applied to
the history of Western art between about 1300 and
1900, since throughout this time an overriding con-
cern was the achievement of more realistic-look-
ing images. A useful starting point is Gombrich’s
(1960) discussion of artistic schemata—cognitive
frameworks that help organize and interpret infor-
mation—which describe how techniques for real-
ism largely follow a structured hypothesis-testing
dynamic. Over time, artists’ technical knowledge
becomes both deeper and more streamlined, and
depictive skill increases (Kozbelt & Seeley, 2007).
Historically, professional artists have had to work
very efficiently—since this is most conducive to ful-
filling commissions and furthering their careers—
and have used a number of heuristics as part of
their depictive schemata. Details of such heuristics
can be culled from studio training manuals from
throughout art history (Gombrich, 1960), as well
as contemporary art instruction books, principles
of drawing instruction pedagogy, laboratory obser-
vations of artists, and process traces from finished
artworks.
Integrating across sources, a basic set of depic-
tive heuristics can be proposed as a framework for
describing the process of rendering in drawing and
painting. These heuristics include, but are not lim-
ited to: plan compositions in advance so that little if
any revision is necessary on the final products; first
sketch important elements using linear denotation
and only later fill them in; correctly establish an
object’s basic proportions and position before add-
ing many details; make the most important objects
in a scene the most salient and distinct from the
background; add the most detail to the most impor-
tant objects, leaving subsidiary or background ele-
ments less elaborated; carry the degree of finish to
a level consistent with current domain standards; in
painting, establish a full tonal range at the outset, so
recalibration of values is not necessary; in general
keep process traces to a minimum. Such heuristics
represent only a small portion of artists’ schemata.
A richer elaboration would involve a hierarchical
control system, with the above heuristics articulated
at a high level of abstraction, commensurate with
artists’ broad goals and strategies, and with lower
levels addressing finer and more particular aspects
of depiction, down to perceptual and motor pro-
grams for individual contextualized decisions and
mark-making movements. A more detailed tempo-
ral ordering of basic heuristics and contingencies
among heuristics would likewise be an essential
part of a richer descriptive model. Overall, these
heuristics capture how an artist depicts something,
rather than what an artist depicts.How heterochronies function in visual art
Such heuristics may seem simple and obvious.
That is precisely the point—the baseline model is
supposed to be boring, straightforward, and aimed
at maximal depictive efficiency. More important for
the enterprise of understanding creativity is that
such hypothesized regularities can illuminate what
happens on occasions when artists depart from the
usual methods of working. Specifically, the relative
timing of the components of artists’ schemata can
be altered in many ways: heuristics can be con-
densed, truncated, expanded, added to, eliminated,
or reordered, at any point in the creative process.