Asides from being written in such a way that I often find difficult to fully understand, Chapter 1 of John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing” discusses the act of seeing as a tool that enables individuals to perceive things in their own way. He discusses the idea that seeing is the primary sense that brings meaning to things.
“Seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognises before it can speak”
Whilst we can talk about things and what we see, no words can describe the fact that we are surrounded by the world around us all at once. Words describe one thing at a time, but seeing enables us to see an entire environment around us.
Berger goes on to discuss how seeing has changed perspectives over time. An example of this is the sight of fire which, in the middle ages, would have caused concern and a sense of fear in individuals, since fire was a symbol of hell. Nowadays religion and cult ideology is no longer the prominent state of mind and therefore elements like fire are no longer seen in the same way; however they are the same exact subject they were centuries ago.
Moving onto art forms as a way of seeing and Berger talks suggests the idea that art is a doorway to another’s eyes; what they see / saw. An art piece is often an image taken in the moment. For example, a painting created in the 17th century would hold the image the artist saw at that very moment. The strokes of paint were as they placed them that exact minute, that exact second in time. Moving on and photographic / film based media is the modern adaptation of this; a singular scene taken from one of infinite perspectives of time.
The idea of physical art then linked up with the following point in which Berger discussed the negative aspect that art in the modern era does not have the same impact as it once had, and that seeing a painting in real life may not convey the same emotions, atmosphere and experience it once had centuries ago. It is suggested that this is down to replication and reproduction through technology, be that the internet or through photography.
People today can have a version of a world famous painting in their living rooms for a fraction of the price of the original (price and value is a topic I will return to). And whilst individuals who have famous paintings mounted on their walls around their house may be viewed as higher class or of a higher intellect, they often fail to recognise that their painting is merely a replica that, in artistic standards, lowers the value and ideals of the painting itself. If such a thing as the Mona Lisa can be replicated by a high-quality printer then why visit the original? Granted the replica does not have the same brush strokes or care put into it that the original piece had, but those who purchase them often do not care for this, and purely wish to replicate the value of the piece in their own home for the benefit of their own societal placement. Okay, so maybe that judgement was slightly naive and biased, but it shows the extent that the act of seeing art has changed over time due to implications on our day to day lives.
Back to the topic of value however, and it is clear there are numerous people and places that try to retain this. Only the other day was I reading an article about a number of places across the world that cannot be viewed online for the pure reason of enjoying them in person.
(However it is worth mentioning that a number of these places were military bases, so that also makes sense) Berger also refers to this, stating that “The uniqueness of every painting was once part of the uniqueness of the place where it resided.”
In conclusion, the act of seeing changes all the time and in terms of art, has significantly changed over the period of centuries. Because of the internet and modern technology, art pieces can be seen online or replicated for individuals at home for a fraction of the price, whereas some places prefer to retain the idea of uniqueness and atmosphere by restricting viewing access to that only where the location is situated. Furthermore, the perspective of art and media can be altered based on the medium it is produced on. For example, social media posts enable the user to create an idealistic scene that doesn’t fully represent the whole scene as it is on the other side of the camera.
Comments