Conclusion and the future of the neuropsychology of art
Convergent evidence coming from different experimental techniques and varied neurological etiologies has informed neuropsychology theories since the 1850s. Ideally, a theory or a model that captures the essence of the brain's control in art would emerge from the exploration of the cases described in this book as well. Such a collection of cases has not been assembled previously and the potential for a unified characterization is clearly present. A unitary formalization at this stage is hampered by several reasons: wide spectrum of personal artistic techniques, the relatively small sample size of artists, unmeasured factors of talent or creativity (innovation), cognitive abstraction, and variability in damage localization, laterality, and size of lesion area, to name but a few primary reasons. In other words, there would necessarily be a lack of uniformity in the way that artists adjust to the damage. Therein lies the difficulty in distilling an overarching neuropsychology theory that could predict how any given artist would produce his art following brain damage.