Rhetorical Analysis Of John Berger 's ' Ways Of Seeing

Over the course of several months the meaning and understanding of aesthetics and its application to art have taken place as a means to expanding the mind of a budding aesthete. Multiple respected aesthetes have been discussed regarding their philosophical approach to art and the theories influencing their philosophical stance. Some theories have been refuted while others have been regarded yet the insight provided by these aesthetes has been profound. Several of these aesthetes studied have helped in shaping one particular individual’s viewpoint in the creation of her own philosophy of art. Art and its significance can be appreciated by critics willing to understand the artist is in control of creating and expressing herself through

The method by which understanding of art can grow is through “the development of intuitive perception and discrimination” and “the handing on of authoritative knowledge;” sharpening the “senses of the soul” being the main purpose (Josef Albers). Pure perception rather than expression both drives and defines true artistic projects.

The question of representation and meaning when it comes to artistic works of any sort many seem a simple question and answer to many people but the answers are actually elusive and the question itself is quite likely specious and misleading on its face. This text will examine why this is likely to be the case.

It has established a common language overtime as a way of communicating over all barrier and often does more than a thousand words to spark someone’s creativity and to help surface some of their most inner emotions. No matter the era, the artist or the individual style used, all works of art can be be compared to find their similarities and differences. This fact becomes increasingly apparent when analyzing W. R. Leigh’s A Close Call and Wivenhoe Park by John Constable. One from the Romanticism era and another from the post-impressionist era, but despite that distinct difference lines of comparison can be uncovered as well as those of contrast. After delving into deep analysis of several pieces of art, the truth in the phrase “a picture paints a thousand words” becomes increasingly true. Although stories are commonly told in the form of words on a page, they can also be told through other mediums such as paint on a canvas. No matter what style was used or what era it was created in, all works of art have stories to tell and can be perceived anyway the viewer wishes. Art exists to help people express and understand their emotions and their are countless examples of this at humanities fingertips ripe for

Throughout history, artists have endeavored to convey emotion, meaning and complexity within a single still image. Salvador Dali, Vincent Van Gogh and Roy Lichtenstein illustrate the embodiment of the human experience within a realm of artistic expression. Each respective artist exemplifies the power of an image to produce a statement regarding the unconscious mind, mental anguish, and the banality of industrial culture. Ultimately, they evoke a poignant story within a simple picture.

John Berger in his essay the “Ways of Seeing” reveals the master of analyzing art which he calls “mystification, the process of explaining away what might otherwise be evident”. To me Berger is teaching his audience just the ability to see the great detail of art, being able to speak about the painting and the great lengths to describe the revolution of how seeing painting has evolved throughout the years. When it comes to art looking and seeing, it has interchangeable meaning to use to describe one perception of a painting. To look at a painting is to glance and notice a few details in the piece. On the other hand seeing a work of art in John Berger’s opinion is not just to observe it, but also to understand, go beyond the surface and connect the painter to the painting. Henry Ossawa Tanner, during the Civil War, painted a portrait called “The Thankful Poor” that reflect on his feeling during that time.

Rooted within John Berger’s observations on the consumption of visual culture, in his 1972 book, Ways of Seeing, is the statement that “The relation between what we see and what we know is never settled”. Within the texts first chapter, Berger endeavours to illustrate the unique nature of perception along with its vulnerability to influence. The author further comments on the loss of independent thinking regarding artwork, instead being replaced by a state of false ‘mystification’. The enigmatic nature of the Baroque piece, ‘Girl with a Pearl Earring’(c.1665), by Dutch artist Johaness Vermeer, proves to allow for unique interpretations that are free from the ‘learnt assumptions’ often implemented by the elite art society. Berger’s desire for

Concentrated study of aesthetics is a luxury that inspires gratitude and carries with it the singular regret of not being able to solely focus on it. As philosophers expose their opinions, one’s own philosophy of art surfaces alongside them. First, creativity need not be distinguished from fine art as this detracts from the goal of fine art to contribute to humanity. Second, mechanical and technological systems and patterns lie outside the realm of fine art as they fail to inspire or connect to the soul. Another paramount requirement of artwork is the prick of the observer in one way or another in order to evoke emotion. Last, uniqueness also finds its way into one’s personal philosophy as art must persuade the observer to consider a new action

A large amount of the images in which society today views are reproductions, via the internet and television. Whether they are physical reproductions, or a picture or video taken of the original image, Berger believes that the reproduction of art eradicates the original meaning of many works of art. “They have entered the mainstream of life over which they no longer, in themselves, have power” (Berger 159).

Critics have been trying to determine what exactly the definition art is for many years now. Throughout history, identifying what was art and what was not was presumed to be obvious. Therefore, one was able to differentiate between art and ordinary things as easily as one could tell one ordinary object from another. However, in the twentieth century, art began to change and works of art either were, or appeared to be, objects of daily life and use. Arthur Danto questions these works of art by asking: if we were given two things that were meant to represent one another, where one is art and the other is not, how do we determine the differences in status? Danto states that an artistic theory is required to determine what is art. He uses the ‘is’ of artistic identification and the ‘Artworld’ theories to distinguish between two objects that are identical, when one is an artwork and the other is not. He develops different criteria that must be met for something to be considered an artwork: aboutness, embodiment of the aboutness and context/history.

Art is a collection of artworks that reflects a message for the audience to interpret. Each piece of artwork is expressed in different forms that communicate an individual’s thoughts and emotions to another person. Every artist has their own individual style which makes them different from the rest. Although artists have similar styles, viewers have their own interpretation when they are analyzing a piece of art in depth. Philosophers claim the uniqueness of art comes from all the creative ideas in one’s mind. Nietzsche believes the appearance of objects matters more than reality of objects but Dewey would disagree.

As onlookers peer into the artworks in front of them, there is no question as to whether or not they considered what the artwork means, where it came from and what the artist was interested in who created it. The

Being of the Marxist persuasion, John Berger believed in the socialist concept of property being equally shared among the people. He points out that, historically, art has been reserved for those in power, possessing wealth and the societal position that have always allowed them to acquire and view art at their leisure. According to Berger, under this context, art is not an asset which should be adamantly concealed from the general public on account of personal circumstances. With his aforesaid statement on the lack of freedom resulting from missing history, he ultimately points out that being excluded from art, something that so beautifully reflects our human history, can be approximated to dehumanizing those who have been placed into a lower class. The incessant nature of this phenomenon is to suggest that the majority is utterly incapable of understanding and interpreting art. Moreover, it is preventive of their very attempt. In the essay, John Berger makes the following statement, "We only see what we look at. To look is an act of choice. As a result of this act, what we see is brought within our reach — though not necessarily within arm’s reach. To touch something is to situate oneself in relation to it. (Close your eyes, move round the room and notice how the faculty of touch is like a static, limited form of sight.) We never look at just one thing; we are always looking at the relation between things and ourselves." (Berger, 1972) This statement, in essence, is to

“I think everything in life is art. What you do, how you dress, the way you love someone, and how you talk. Your smile and your personality, what you believe in, and all your dreams. The way you drink your tea, how you decorate your home, or party; your grocery list, the food you make, how your writing looks, and the way you feel. Life is art.” – Helena Bonham Carter. Everything I seem to appreciate I note that one way or another I end up relating whatever it is that stimulates my mind to art always. I’m constantly thinking in my mind how the smallest of things can drastically change the appearance of things, the way they make you feel and communicate essentially. One word in which you can observe me saying nearly in every sentence is the word “aesthetic”. The word “aesthetic” lacks usage and is absent in the vocabulary of various people I have spoken to throughout my life, by no means am I suggesting for the word to be clichéd, but it is note-worthy to say that it is definitely under used.

Growing up we always have been compelled to question. Why is the sky blue? Why does the earth spin? What is the point of life? In fact, it could be a possibility that even a majority of the words we expel from our mouths as a kid is “why?”. Yet, out of the thousands of questions that have ever entered our brain, a rare one to ponder is: how does one view art? One may say that art is subjective, that viewers take away what they want from it. However, another may say another completely different opinion; for instance, John Berger, a famous art critic, believed art could only be viewed in the context of its own history, otherwise the painting would become “mystified” (Berger 144). In a way, Berger expects everyone to mystify the art work they view unless they truly see in the specific way he believes is right. Keeping this in mind, I attempted to view art differently than I ever have before, with a clear mind, questions to engage in conversation with the artwork, and a yearning for the history of it’s past at the ninth annual Art Prize.