Bethany Alexandrine A.

Sajulga August 24, 2022

GE 6 – L (Art Appreciation) BS CE – II

Thematic Essay on John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing”

In the first of this four-part documentary, Berger discusses the authenticity and how
that becomes warped and fetishized when we can reproduce images. He goes on to argue
that the real meaning of many images has been obscured by academics, changed by
photographic reproduction and monetary value. To argue that the reproductions will
always have flaws still leaves problems, because the uniqueness no longer resides in the
meaning of its symbolic significance but rather in its unique physical existence. Its value
lies now not so much in what it says but, in its rarity, and the price in would fetch. Since art
is regarded as superior to commerce, there is an uprising of conflict here. The original
image still holds value to Berger. The original is silent and has traces of the painter’s
actions, creating a closeness between the painter and the viewer, so making the painting, in
a sense, contemporary.

A second major impact was the destruction of the uniqueness of an image. By

reproducing an image, the camera multiplies and breaks up its meaning. Reproduction
separates the meaning from a painting and that meaning is modified to a greater or lesser
extent. For instance, an allegorical picture can be made into a portrait by choosing a
specific portion of it. By choosing specific elements from a painting and arranging them in a
particular order, a film maker can construct an argument. Presented with the painting
itself, the viewer takes in the full image in an instant, and even while looking at a specific
location, can always refer to the whole. The meaning can be altered by how words and
visuals are arranged. Depending on the context, an image will have a different meaning. A
reproduction could of the artwork could be pinned to someone’s clothing or used in
advertising, which frequently reinforces the mystification of art.

As time went on, perspective in art began to focus on the viewer, who could only be
in one location at a time. It was implied that images were timeless. This was revamped by
photography, particularly the movie camera. Where you were in both time and space
determined what you saw. The artist’s vision was altered by the camera. As the light
changed, so did the look of the thing, and Cubists no longer recognized a single point of
view [for example, they would paint a face with an eye viewed from one vantage point and
the nose from another]. Impressionists saw the visible in constant change. A second major
impact was the destruction of the uniqueness of an image. By reproducing an image, the
camera multiplies and breaks up its meaning.