Beauty in its highest form is often called ‘sublime.’ Everyone has one of those ‘wow’ moments when standing over the Grand Canyon, for example. This has been true throughout the ages. Edmund Burke defined ‘sublime art’ in the mid-eighteenth century as art that has a greatness beyond all possible calculation, measurement or imitation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The question is whether nature is more intense than art that depicts nature.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
What this boils down to is the conundrum: Does reality or the artful depiction of reality offer more in the way of ‘wows’? Is nature more intense? Does it instil more fear (for example, during a storm) than art that depicts (sometimes threatening) nature?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Virtual reality<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Researchers at the Universit\u00e0 Cattolica del Sacro Cuore<\/em> in Milan, Italy, and two other European institutions, wanted to know if that debate that generations of artists and art lovers have had is also useful in the here and now. To do this, they compared the emotional responses of 50 people who took part in a virtual reality trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
While wearing (360-degree) VR glasses, participants were shown two performances. One was a virtual reimagining of Vincent van Gogh’s “Starry Night,” similar to the one shown in this video:<\/p>\n\n\n\n