According to Berger, there is a relationship in the way we see and talk. He argues that before talking one must see to form the words describing what he sees. Berger believes that we view art in a different way than we did in the past. The main reason for us to see art in a different way is because we have introduced technology into our lives (Berger, 35). The way things were viewed in the past was also different because one could only view a certain painting in the same size and shape. The painting could not also be viewed in different places. Today we use photographs to convey the painting into different sizes and shapes. Technology enables us to see the picture in many places. It also enables different people to see the painting at the same time but in different places (Berger, 23).
Technology reproduces an original work, therefore, making it ambiguous and less unique. By the use of a camera on an already still painting, the photographer can focus on certain parts, zooming in and cropping what he does not want the viewer to see. Berger explains this fact by giving an example of Breughel’s “Procession to Calvary." He says that the photographer uses his camera to focus and manipulate instances that may be seen as religious for the painting to have some religious aspect which it does not possess. The photographer, therefore, gives the painting another meaning from its original one.
The camera destroys images that were unique and timeless. With the reproduction of a painting by a camera, the original image loses its uniqueness and meaning. There can also be a situation whereby different meanings come about because the image is seen in many different areas. An original painting costs a lot of money whereas a duplicated one is cheaper. This shows how the camera makes a painting or an image lose value (Berger, 26). The message behind the painting is often ignored or lost. If it is to be derived a different meaning comes about our time. Because of the reproduction brought about by the camera on works of arts, any person can use the work of art.
Berger provides an example of cultural mystification (Berger, 16). He criticizes Seymour’s analysis of Franz Hals paintings. He believes that Hals was the first artist to demonstrate expressions in social relations and the characters made by capitalism. Berger identifies mystification as the unchanging personal vision of the human condition. The language of the historian removes the paintings from their situation historically. Berger argues that people are unable to view and see art as it was like the art of the days of the past. In the development of oil paintings, people were more in touch with the painting since it symbolized their property. The period of Renaissance proved that people had a special connection to the works of art and the property they owned (Berger, 12). He also criticizes the Christian paintings saying that they are so empty in that they do not show what is on the individual such as his possessions. Many people in that time used painters to portray how much wealth they owned. There was painting for every household that spoke of their economic status.
Seeing relates to text recognition in that one must be able to see to recognize text. To write one must also be able also to see to write the text. Works of art like paintings speak louder than text. They speak volumes to different viewers.
Work cited
Berger, John. "Ways of seeing. London: BBC." (1972): 1-35.
