REPORT Neurology of the Arts Mansell Bequest Symposium at the Medical Society of London 30 April–1 May 2001

Philosophical instruments were designed to examine phenomena experimentally, rather than by naturalistic observation alone. In the nineteenth century, some instruments were called philosophical toys because they provided popular amusement as well as experimental assistance. They were applied widely in natural philosophy, but attention here is directed particularly to manipulations of perceived space and time and their influence on art. One of the earliest instruments, which had a profound impact on art as well as science, was the camera obscura. It assisted image formation in art before it was applied as an analogy to the eye at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Later philosophical toys were used to address visual perception of motion and depth. Development was initially driven by the need for stimulus control so that the methods of physics could be applied to the study of perceptual phenomena. The principal instruments were invented in the first half of the nineteenth century, and they consisted of simple contrivances that manipulated time and space in ways that had not previously been appreciated. They included thaumatropes, phenakistoscopes, stroboscopes, anorthoscopes, stereoscopes, tachistoscopes, and chronoscopes. Several of these philosophical toys proved to be phenomenally popular, particularly when combined with photography.     

Kaleidoscopism: The Circulation of a Mid-Century Metaphor and Motif

Abstract

This essay traces the mid-century revival of interest in a particular nineteenth-century optical technology – David Brewster’s kaleidoscope – following P. B. Shelley’s coining of the term ‘kalleidoscopism’ to describe the broad popular appeal and enthusiastic uptake of the device in the late 1810s. Through an examination of mid-nineteenth-century fiction, journalism, and scientific writing, this essay explores what it meant to be ‘kaleidoscopic’ in this period and demonstrates how the mechanical structure and physical manipulation of the device informed this meaning. Controlled by the hand of the user, its display offered regulated surprise: a visual environment that did not overwhelm but rather enthralled viewers through its creation of abstracted, symmetrical forms and harmonious colour palettes led by individual taste. Contemporary reference to the kaleidoscope’s display and operation reveals it was increasingly aligned with notions of a stable, controlled, and unified visual environment in which mobility was valued but digression was mechanically impossible; it signalled the mastery of sensory data and the creation of meaning from fractured forms. My discussion uncovers new contexts for its popularity c. 1840–1865 in Victorian fiction, journalism, physiological science, and the fine arts, and discusses two under-studied examples of the kaleidoscopic in the visual art of the Pre-Raphaelites. The essay concludes by exploring Brewster’s speculative application of the kaleidoscope as an early form of cinematic media, contending that this simple optical device provokes a reconsideration of the categorization of Victorian pre-cinematic technologies.