Berger vs. Appiah

Although John Berger and Anthony Appiah discuss very different topics in their essays Ways of Seeing and race, they are very similar in several ways. I found that the two have similar writing styles. Although Berger’s is a little bit more complex than Appiah’s, I found that they both write using extremely long sentences and difficult vocabulary. Aside from writing styles, I also found Berger and Appiah similar in their views. Both seem to go against the normal view of society. For example, in Berger’s essay he makes the argument that reproductions of art are a bad thing, whereas most of society views reproductions as a good thing because it allows the masses the opportunity to view works of art. In Appiah’s essay he makes the argument that race does not exist, which definitely goes against the common belief of most of society. Another way that I found Berger and Appiah to be similar is in the way that they explain and support their arguments. In Berger’s essay he is extremely interested in the details of the artwork. He wants to understand who made the painting, why the time period of the painting is significant, why the painting was made, and other details that may change the meaning of a piece of art. In Appiah’s essay he is interested in the history behind the word race as well as the science and biology of race. Berger and Appiah don’t simply state their opinions; they back up their arguments with many different facts and examples. By doing this both are able to create an argument that is convincing and appealing to the