Seeing John Berger
Donny Halim
Jeff Cravello
Bridge
October 28, 2010
Seeing Comes First
One of the most important senses that we human have is the ability to see things. We see the image of the object first before the image is send to our brain and processes it. The essay “Ways of Seeing”, written by John Berger took art as an example, to show the way how modern people view art and the influences that traditional oil painting has had on society and modern day society. The way people now a day perceives an art image is different than the way it was seen before. People nowadays have the idea that a painting is an image that the painter painted and whatever it is there is always a reason for it. And most of us going to art museum have the assumption …show more content…
of wanting to find the truth within the image, trying to link history to the present. These assumptions only make the past more unclear and does not clarify, but mystify. According to Berger, most painters are not searching for fame, such as the painter Frans Hals, who lived off public charity in order to be able to produce works. This has changed over time too due the birth of camera, since paintings are widely accessible; people go to museums viewing art because of its fame. More painting are being seen in public now, and the more people who seen it the more fame it will gain. This will eventually lose the value of art.
In the world today, we see art not only because it’s the one and only painting, but as John Berger mentioned in the essay, people look at art with an idea that it have the elements or characteristic, such as beauty, truth, genius, civilization, form, status, taste and etc.
We examine art as if those traits and characteristic must be presented, in order for us to enjoy viewing it. However, we all may know or not know that the only person who can give us the answer we are looking for is the artist himself. This brings up the word “mystification”, which is when we people look at an art painting; we always first give our own assumption about the image, these assumption that are generated by the viewer would only lead the viewer with more myth around them instead of clarifying them. Let’s take the painting “Violin and Candlestick” painted by Georges Braque as an example, when I first look at this painting I was quickly mesmerized by the way complication of it, the next thing I continued doing right away was to look for a pattern in the image. Before searching for an explanation online, I was convinced that this is probably what people in nineteenth century find beautiful. However, once I found out that this kind of art is called cubism, and it’s suppose to show all visible angle of certain image, my assumption changed. Now whenever I see a painting with this similar pattern, I would try to look for what is the object that this artist is trying to …show more content…
unfold.
The other thing that also allows the mystification is the invention of camera, which is to mechanically reproduce an image.
These machines focus only on one accurate precise view of the image, which allows the photographer to choose which angle is the best in his perspective. These allow massive reproduction of a painting, which allows more people to get access to what they think it’s the same thing. What they don’t know is that a camera can dissect a picture making it into different pieces, which eventually gives it another meaning. I found an image of “The Doctor” which is painted by Luke Fildes online, on first sight of the image, I quickly noticed that there was a child sleeping in front of an adult, the first thing that came to my mind, was that this man was probably trying to tell a bed time story to a sleeping child, however, when I went on and research on this particular painting, I found and explanation, saying that the painter is trying to portrait a concerned physician watching a dying child, which is based on death of the painters son. Furthermore I also found the original painting of this image which shows that there is actually 3 adult present in this painting. The picture I initially saw was just a small section of the real one, and with just an old man and a little girl sleeping, I thought I have seen the whole painting and quickly gave that assumption. The way that the camera took a painting and dissect it into a new image, will only continue
not to clarify, but gives people more question left unsolved. In addition, the value of the original painting also degrades with the inventions of camera. People now can just go online or look at pictures instead of going to see the real painting.
“Seeing which establishes our place in the surrounding world; we explain that world with words, but words can never undo the fact that we are surrounded by it.” (Berger 97) Explanation about an image is what we people do all the time. We try to find explanation in image, whenever we see one although the chances of find it may be slim, but all of us seem to do it all the time. This eventually will decrease the value of the image itself. The camera which allows us to reproduce an exact image of a painting, also gives access to millions of people in the world, which they thought they have seen the same thing. However, a lot of people do not notice that what they think is always already preconceived by the explanation next to the image. Either we read the text first or not, we are already preconceived by the other image or the explanation about the other images. This brings back to the topic mystification, because the more explanation we have towards a picture, in the end we are going to confuse ourselves.
The word art has a whole new meaning now, it is now able to be reproduced and more people are able view it, it not just for the elite group to enjoy. And by placing certain text for explanation of the image next to it can give the viewer another meaning. With the reproduction, arts value has been on a different level than before. To see the real painting is what people want right now; however, the action of wanting to see the real painting is also generated by the fame of the painting that is brought by camera. Due to technology, art is now more widely viewed and appreciated, because of being about to put pictures in books, postcards or posters. However, it cannot undo the fact that it changed our perspective and our value for art.
[pic]
[pic]
Jeff Cravello
Bridge
October 28, 2010
Seeing Comes First
One of the most important senses that we human have is the ability to see things. We see the image of the object first before the image is send to our brain and processes it. The essay “Ways of Seeing”, written by John Berger took art as an example, to show the way how modern people view art and the influences that traditional oil painting has had on society and modern day society. The way people now a day perceives an art image is different than the way it was seen before. People nowadays have the idea that a painting is an image that the painter painted and whatever it is there is always a reason for it. And most of us going to art museum have the assumption …show more content…
of wanting to find the truth within the image, trying to link history to the present. These assumptions only make the past more unclear and does not clarify, but mystify. According to Berger, most painters are not searching for fame, such as the painter Frans Hals, who lived off public charity in order to be able to produce works. This has changed over time too due the birth of camera, since paintings are widely accessible; people go to museums viewing art because of its fame. More painting are being seen in public now, and the more people who seen it the more fame it will gain. This will eventually lose the value of art.
In the world today, we see art not only because it’s the one and only painting, but as John Berger mentioned in the essay, people look at art with an idea that it have the elements or characteristic, such as beauty, truth, genius, civilization, form, status, taste and etc.
We examine art as if those traits and characteristic must be presented, in order for us to enjoy viewing it. However, we all may know or not know that the only person who can give us the answer we are looking for is the artist himself. This brings up the word “mystification”, which is when we people look at an art painting; we always first give our own assumption about the image, these assumption that are generated by the viewer would only lead the viewer with more myth around them instead of clarifying them. Let’s take the painting “Violin and Candlestick” painted by Georges Braque as an example, when I first look at this painting I was quickly mesmerized by the way complication of it, the next thing I continued doing right away was to look for a pattern in the image. Before searching for an explanation online, I was convinced that this is probably what people in nineteenth century find beautiful. However, once I found out that this kind of art is called cubism, and it’s suppose to show all visible angle of certain image, my assumption changed. Now whenever I see a painting with this similar pattern, I would try to look for what is the object that this artist is trying to …show more content…
unfold.
The other thing that also allows the mystification is the invention of camera, which is to mechanically reproduce an image.
These machines focus only on one accurate precise view of the image, which allows the photographer to choose which angle is the best in his perspective. These allow massive reproduction of a painting, which allows more people to get access to what they think it’s the same thing. What they don’t know is that a camera can dissect a picture making it into different pieces, which eventually gives it another meaning. I found an image of “The Doctor” which is painted by Luke Fildes online, on first sight of the image, I quickly noticed that there was a child sleeping in front of an adult, the first thing that came to my mind, was that this man was probably trying to tell a bed time story to a sleeping child, however, when I went on and research on this particular painting, I found and explanation, saying that the painter is trying to portrait a concerned physician watching a dying child, which is based on death of the painters son. Furthermore I also found the original painting of this image which shows that there is actually 3 adult present in this painting. The picture I initially saw was just a small section of the real one, and with just an old man and a little girl sleeping, I thought I have seen the whole painting and quickly gave that assumption. The way that the camera took a painting and dissect it into a new image, will only continue
not to clarify, but gives people more question left unsolved. In addition, the value of the original painting also degrades with the inventions of camera. People now can just go online or look at pictures instead of going to see the real painting.
“Seeing which establishes our place in the surrounding world; we explain that world with words, but words can never undo the fact that we are surrounded by it.” (Berger 97) Explanation about an image is what we people do all the time. We try to find explanation in image, whenever we see one although the chances of find it may be slim, but all of us seem to do it all the time. This eventually will decrease the value of the image itself. The camera which allows us to reproduce an exact image of a painting, also gives access to millions of people in the world, which they thought they have seen the same thing. However, a lot of people do not notice that what they think is always already preconceived by the explanation next to the image. Either we read the text first or not, we are already preconceived by the other image or the explanation about the other images. This brings back to the topic mystification, because the more explanation we have towards a picture, in the end we are going to confuse ourselves.
The word art has a whole new meaning now, it is now able to be reproduced and more people are able view it, it not just for the elite group to enjoy. And by placing certain text for explanation of the image next to it can give the viewer another meaning. With the reproduction, arts value has been on a different level than before. To see the real painting is what people want right now; however, the action of wanting to see the real painting is also generated by the fame of the painting that is brought by camera. Due to technology, art is now more widely viewed and appreciated, because of being about to put pictures in books, postcards or posters. However, it cannot undo the fact that it changed our perspective and our value for art.
[pic]
[pic]