Menninghaus et al. (2017) provide a valuable conceptual framework for considering the paradox of enjoying negative emotions in the arts. This is an important step, which lays out two interrelated processes – distancing and embracing – and addresses a much needed topic of aesthetics and, indeed, provides a number of valuable hypotheses that can and should be investigated in future empirical and theoretical research.

The model suggests that a certain pre-state of activating an art/aesthetic schema sets the stage for two sequential main processes: a “distancing factor,” which invokes, or we would argue, implies, existential safety and “control,” followed by a process of “embracing,” which presumably is the main component of interest – providing visual pleasure and intellectual or hedonic enjoyment of art – and would presumably coincide with the main aspects of “mastery” or “savoring” in most discussions of art experience (cf. Pelowski et al. Reference Pelowski, Markey, Lauring and Leder2016). Especially negative emotions are argued to be enjoyed if and only if at least one component (from several subfactors) of distancing in concert with one component of embracing is activated.

We agree, and it is indeed supported by literature (e.g., Berlyne Reference Berlyne1970; Kant Reference Kant1963/1790; or discussions about the sublime: Burke Reference Burke1757; Ishizu & Zeki Reference Ishizu and Zeki2014), that intertwined processes of distancing and embracing might be a necessary precondition for better enjoyment of negative emotions. However, we also argue that – beyond noting that art enjoyment should involve striking some balance between psychological or bodily distance from and perceptual engagement with a stimulus – the main research question may in fact start from this point: Namely, what are the necessary psychological mechanisms and conditions whereby distancing and embracing might be variably engaged? Relatedly, we might consider art engagement as recursive appraisal loops of pre-state, distancing, and embracing, which are tightly linked to momentary personal and emotional states. We especially consider the connection to empathy, based on recent evidence, which may be an important aspect to further consider in conjunction with the Distancing-Embracing model.

Here, we concentrate and elaborate on the recursive relation of continuous distancing (implied in the model) to embracing. A central aspect of the Embracing factor includes perceiving, experiencing, and regulating emotions (see the model in Fig. 1 of the target article). This set of processes can be modulated by empathy or the ability to feel into and understand one's own or another's affective states (Singer & Lamm Reference Singer and Lamm2009). According to Menninghaus et al., such empathetic processes might be an important (although not necessarily sufficient) ingredient for a better experience of negative emotions, allowing individuals to experience emotions as an aspect of embracing them and, in negative cases, providing a self-gratifying experience that individuals can understand and perhaps control their (negative) emotional response (e.g., via meta-appraisals or conversion into mixed emotions).

A recent functional magnetic resonance imaging study by Ishizu and Zeki (Reference Ishizu and Zeki2017), researching brain networks during enjoyment of emotionally negatively and positively valenced artistic photographs, supports the above argument. Both positive and negative photographs that were experienced as aesthetically preferable coincided with higher activation in brain reward areas. More importantly, only in the case of negative photographs was this higher activity modulated by areas dedicated to empathy, such as the supplementary motor area/medial cingulate cortex. Additionally, negative photographs coincided with activations in inferior frontal gyrus and inferior parietal lobule, areas related to emotion contagion (itself an empathy component). Elsewhere, participants with higher trait empathy or higher emotion contagion tended to report more intense (Baltes & Miu Reference Baltes and Miu2014) and better aesthetic experiences for, as an example, emotionally negative music (Eerola et al. Reference Eerola, Vuoskoski and Kautiainen2016; Garrido & Schubert Reference Garrido and Schubert2011). This would fit the model suggestion that “embracing” emotional content is a key aspect of enjoying negative art

As noted in the model, however, empathy alone might not be a sufficient condition to like negative art. This too was recently demonstrated by Gernot et al. (Reference Gernot, Pelowski and Leder2017).Footnote ² In this study, participants high in emotion contagion and trait empathy showed more intense emotional “embracing” as indicated by self-reports and psychophysiological (facial electromyography, skin conductance responses) measures, but this did not result in higher enjoyment of negative art. Based on similar considerations Menninghaus et al. thus advocated an additional mechanism incorporating “being moved,” suspense, or similar mixed emotion blends. Indeed, several studies report higher enjoyment of negative emotions through being moved in the case of sad films or music (Eerola et al. Reference Eerola, Vuoskoski and Kautiainen2016; Hanich et al. Reference Hanich, Wagner, Shah, Jacobsen and Menninghaus2014; Wassiliwizky et al. Reference Wassiliwizky, Wagner, Jacobsen and Menninghaus2015). Interestingly, however, in Gernot et al. (Reference Gernot, Pelowski and Leder2017), although high- compared with low-empathic participants also reported being moved more, they still disliked emotionally negative art.

This failure to obtain an increase in liking for negative art, even in conjunction with moving emotional experience, might be caused by an imbalance of distancing and embracing processes. High empathy may allow individuals to embrace affective content in art; however, if they are not able to regulate, distance themselves, or reappraise the elicited emotions, the overall aesthetic experience might remain negative. If, on the other hand, individuals can – even if they originally feel strong emotion – somehow conceptualize or “control” their experience, they might be able to enjoy negative art. This in our minds implies that distancing, in particular, is not a binary state engaged at the beginning of an experience, but rather is a continuously updated relation between the individual and art. Indeed, such an argument would fit with several theories involving enjoying emotional experiences in art (see, e.g., Cupchik and Wroblewski-Raya Reference Cupchik and Wroblewski-Raya1988; or Derryberry Reference Derryberry1988). They suggest that processing can involve a switch within experience between an aesthetic and more felt pragmatic mode. This was also recently posited in a model of art experience by Pelowski et al. (Reference Pelowski, Markey, Forster, Gerger and Leder2017), suggesting this active switch and the conditions whereby individuals may choose to modulate their distance from art. Equally, the evidence from the above empathy studies might suggest that some individuals cannot distance themselves. These aspects might be future candidates for model refinements.