Ways of Seeing

Ways of Seeing

What we see when we look at objects including artwork is affected by what we know (past experience or general knowledge). This dynamic relationship also creates awareness that we ourselves can be seen and also brings in the understanding that other people may see the same object differently based on their own knowledge and experience.

Today paintings have been reproduced by various means. Consider a painting that was originally painted in a particular area and time period. This original work is probably displayed in a significant place that adds to its meaning. When this original work is reproduced and distributed, one can say it has been relocated. This relocation can affect the way we see the painting. A painting made for an old historical monument (say a church) usually tells a story about the church's memories. The same painting reproduced and hung up on the living room wall or pinned on a personal pinboard may not convey the entire complex essence of the painting. 

Similarly, suppose a viewer is made to listen to two opposing musical recordings while viewing a painting, this could impact his understanding. Also if he made to look at two or more opposing sights between viewing the painting, his opinion can again be cluttered. Filmmakers can focus and highlight parts of a painting (zoom) to distort meaning by focusing excessively on only certain elements rather than the whole painting. The last scenario Berger highlights are when a viewer has presented information about the painting (such as knowledge that a particular artwork was the last one painted by the artist before committing suicide or historical significance), it may lead to change in initial perception. Furthermore, there might be attempts by "art experts" to force a perception on the viewer. These observations let us conclude that it is very difficult to have an unbiased and completely authentic perception of a work of art. But the mere awareness that these mental biases are going to come into play might just undo the problem.

Berger then talks about the value of paintings. Because of reproductions, the value of a painting has been largely based on its rarity and originality rather than what the painting is about. To elaborate, art museums contain extensive records to prove that the artworks they hold are real Da Vinci's or real Van Gogh's. Because of reproductions, it is more necessary to prove the originality of an artwork and that becomes its value. Artistic value and market value may not necessarily correlate.

Berger also talks about women and art. In the traditional sense, the man is the symbol of physical power or moral values or financial strength. When you look at a man, his presence is indicative of what he can do to you or for you. But when you look at a woman, her presence is indicative of what you can or cannot do to her. A woman is divided into two halves. One part of her exists as an object that is to be viewed, surveyed, analyzed and hopefully appreciated by men. The other part of her is a viewer who views herself from the outside primarily from the viewpoint of the men around her. She is an object to the men and at times to herself.

European nude oil paintings presented women in a similar way, that is, as a sight. There is a difference between being naked and being nude. Being naked is personal but being nude is being naked for the viewer while losing the sense of self. The naked body was somehow treated like a sight for those who are dressed. The takeaway from the story of Adam and Eve was that they were the ones who first realized nakedness on eating the forbidden fruit and hence nakedness is in the eye of the beholder (it did not exist prior to the act). Some nude paintings bring in the idea of shame. This shame is directed towards the viewer rather than between the subjects of the painting who are nude together. The mirror became the symbol of vanity for women due to a painting of Susana viewing herself as a sight to men in the mirror. Berger highlights the hypocrisy in this by pointing out that the man has drawn the naked woman for his pleasure and then proceeds to morally put her down for being “vain”. Another observation is that the women in most nude paintings look toward the viewer even if a lover is present in the painting; this is to entice the spectator-owner.

He continues to explain that not all nude paintings are meant as a feast for there male owner’s desires and judgment. There are few exceptions. These usually contain the woman naked in a serene environment all by herself. Some other cultures represent both man and woman naked in the painting but in an environment where both are completely equal to each other and are participating equally.

John Berger says that the purchase of oil painting is not unlike buying the object that it contains(the subject of the painting). Certain paintings celebrated merchandise, pedigree livestock, elaborate architecture as the principal subject of the painting. This was to show that the owner of the painting of wealth. The oil painting depicts luxury and brings the tone of a certain kind of lifestyle. These paintings are treated like valuable treasures; they are valued a lot of money, they are guarded against theft, they are preserved with utmost care and using sophisticated instruments. From the Renaissance period onwards, paintings were viewed more as a unique object needed to possessed that spoke of social status rather than a work of art. 

John Berger then talks about the depiction of luxury, wealth and power in European art. In European art, the tone set by pictures showing powerful men with wealth surrounding them is of superiority. The Europeans wanted an egoistic and boastful display of wealth and power. The only message these paintings were meant to communicate was the highly incorrect and biased notion that Europeans were the greatest compared to all other.

Other communities also painted wealth, power and luxury, but these showed the characters in the paintings with a sort of humbleness blended with intellectual progress. They were more about religion and divinity. The luxurious objects (for example, expensive carpet, grand clothing etc) shown in these paintings were not overemphasized. European paintings highlighted luxurious items in the paintings so as to draw the viewer's attention and tell the viewer how rich the character in the painting is.  Rich owners got portraits done of themselves and their family members through generations to display continuity of wealth, power and send the message that they (the owners) were objects of envy and must be envied by the viewers. Concluding his opinion on the topic John Berger does not fail to mention despite this nature of most European oil painting, the European landscape paintings did not have the essence of the obsession with possession.

Publicity manufactures glamour to generate a sense of envy in the onlooker. It tells us that we can turn into a superior and envied beings purchasing material objects. It sells the idea we are adding value to our life through objects while reducing our earnings. By publicizing art as a symbol of wealth, power, money, glamor, beauty, luxury, love viewers could be encouraged to buy them. The strategy is to create the illusion that- one is what one owns. A promise is made to the audience that purchase of a certain object will bring betterment and envy from others. At, the same time a threat is made to the same audience that lack of said object will bring a sense of invisibility, non-existence, and failure of meeting certain standards.  The concept of publicity is to sell unrealistic ideas and to abuses almost everything to entice its audience. Publicized content is almost always based on something fake, unrealistic and dishonest.

John Berger's Ways Of Seeing attempts to shed light on all the ways visual elements such as art, photographs, advertised content etc can be interpreted wrongly and used as tools of manipulation. He attempts to debunk the false mystification of art and is quite successful in his attempt. The core lesson here is that everything (especially art) is not what it seems, or what it is presented as. There are many mental biases coming from both internal and external sources that influence how we see. And it is important to have a complete awareness of what we see, what we interpret, what we learn so as to not be influenced or manipulated. Thoughts that are forced into our minds through biases must be recognized. It is more valuable and correct to look at art,photographs,advertisements etc from the cleanest and unbiased perspective we can manage.