In 1, all the elements of the picture are symmetrical except the position of C. on the Right, and the long flowing line to Left.  In 2, there is a slightly greater variation.  The mass of the figures is to Right, and the C. entirely over against the deep perspective and the flowing line on the Left, and the direction of both faces toward that side.  In 3, the greater part of C.’s figure on Left is opposed by the direction of his lines and movement to Right.  Thus these three pictures, whether or not they are considered as presenting a balance, at least show several well-defined factors which detach themselves from the general symmetrical scheme. (1) Interest in C. is opposed by outward-pointing line; (2) greater mass, by outward-pointing line, deep vista, and direction of attention; and (3) again interest by direction of line and suggestion of movement.

This analysis of several aesthetically pleasing but asymmetrical arrangements of space strongly suggests that the elements of large size, deep perspective, suggested movement, and intrinsic interest are in some way equivalent in their power to arouse those motor impulses which we believe to constitute the basis of aesthetic response.  It is the purpose of these experiments to follow up the lines of these suggestions, reducing them to their simplest forms and studying them under exact conditions.

But before describing the instruments and methods of this experimental treatment, I wish to speak of the articles on the ’AEsthetics of Simple Form,’ published as Studies from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory, by Dr. Edgar Pierce.[15] These articles, sub-entitled ‘Symmetry’ and ‘The Functions of the Elements’ seem at first sight to anticipate the discussions of this paper; but a short analysis shows that while they point in the same direction, they nevertheless deal with quite different questions and in a different manner.  In the statement of his problem, indeed, Dr. Pierce is apparently treading the same path.

   [15] Pierce E.:  PSYCH.  REV., 1894, I., p. 483; 1896, III., p.
   270.

He says:  “Can a feeling of symmetry, that is, of aesthetical equality of the two halves, remain where the two sides are not geometrically identical; and if so, what are the conditions under which this can result—­what variations of one side seem aesthetically equal to the variations of the other side?” Some preliminary experiments resulted in the conclusion that an unsymmetrical and yet pleasing arrangement of a varied content rests on the pleasure in unity, thus shutting out the Golden Section choice, which depends on the pleasure in variety.  That is, the choices made will not in general follow the golden section, but ’when the figure consists of two halves, the pleasure must be a feeling of aesthetical symmetry.’