Now that we've talked about essays and poetry, I want to move forward and think about the visual arts a bit. Remember, the idea of the course is that "the world is a text," something that can be creatively and constructively "read." This applies as much to the visual arts as it does to traditional forms of written communication. I thought poetry would be a good transition between linguistic and visual arts because poetry is so densely imagistic (especially the poems we looked at by Williams, Davidson, Bishop, McHugh, and Koch, which were all defined by their vivid, visual imagery).
With this in mind, read Chapter 1 in Berger's Ways of Seeing, paying close attention to his ideas regarding belief and perception, text and context, and the relationship between art and mechanical reproduction. Compared to what we've read so far this semester, the ideas in this essay are a bit more dense and complicated, but don't let that frustrate you. If something is unclear in your reading, just write down a note and we can talk about it in class. Part of all constructive reading is friction and frustration; we only learn by going beyond what we don't understand.
When you're finished reading this section, answer these 4 questions:
1.) In what way is how we see the world affected by what we believe or know?
2.) Why does Berger argue, "today we see the art of the past as nobody ever saw it before"?
3.) According to Berger, how does actual written text around a painting change the text of the painting itself?
4.) Do you think mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art? How? Why?
Post your answers in the "COMMENTS" section of this post. You might also bring a printed copy to class, so that you have something to refer to when we are discussing the reading.
16 comments:
1. The way we see the world is affected by what we believe or know because we are taught to perceive different images in different ways from the time we are born. The way we perceive images changes through time in relation to how others see the same images. Some people use explanations for what they are seeing and try to come up with explanations for the things they see that are unexplainable.
2. Berger argues this because we as the viewer look at paintings differently because our culture has changed since early times. We no longer hold the same virtues and ideals that our ancestors did which makes us perceive paintings in different ways.
3. The written text around a painting changes the text in the painting because it makes the viewer wonder more about the artist and their intentions. It changes what message the painting gives to us because we now have more information about the painting itself and it leaves less room for the viewer to come up with their own conclusions on what the painting means and symbolizes.
4. I don’t think that mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art. I do think that it has changed how we value art. A painting would still provoke the same thoughts if it were a print, so reproducing it does not change our perception of the piece. However, it does make us appreciate the art less and forget how much effort was put into a piece.
Alexander Cotton
1) Our social experiences determine how we see the world. No one looks at the world through the same lense.
2) Berger aruges that the images of the past are no longer unique. Our culture has changed drastically, along with or beliefs and values.
3) Berger states that the written text around the image changes the original meaning. "...each image reproduced has become part of an argument which has little or nothing to do with the panting's original independent meaning"(28).
4) I don't feel that mechanical reproduction of art has changed how we see art. I think reproduction has made art more avaible. The social norm used to be that only upper-class individuals could see art, now anyone can go to an art musuem. In a way I think the reproduction of art was necessary.
1.) The way we see the world is affected by what we believe and know because we like to see things in a way that supports what we believe and have learned in life. As humans we don’t like to discover things that contradict what we believe and we tend to dislike ideas and images that are truthful but display unpleasant pictures of our world. So we have the tendency to distort the meaning of things to fit with our beliefs.
2.) Berger argues that we see the art of the past as nobody has seen it before because our culture has changed greatly since the original works were created. We now look at works through a different lens than the people in the past looked at them because our values and beliefs have changed since then. The ability to reproduce images has also changed how we see them because people no longer have to travel to the site that houses the image to see it. Reproduction of images allows a much larger and more diverse group of people to view art.
3.) Berger argues that actual written text around a painting changes the text of the painting itself because once a person has read that text they have the meaning of the image preset in their mind. Then when they look at the image they look for things that define what the written text around the image said.
4.) I don’t think that mechanical reproduction has changed the meaning behind pieces of art because I believe people can still study the era when it was produced and where and why the piece was produced which can help them discover the meaning behind the piece. However, I do think that reproduction can lead to more meanings of a piece of art because the piece is available to larger audience that can look at it from different backgrounds. I also think that reproduction can influence the value of a piece of art.
1) How we see the world is affected by what we know or believe because what we know/believe may change how we interpret what we see in the world. For example, someone sees a lion chase and kill a gazelle. This person may interpret this as the lion is merely a killing machine and should be put down before it kills any more innocent animals. Another person would see this event and interpret it as the lion is simply doing what it must to survive, and that they (the person) would do the same thing if they were in the lion’s position.
2) Berger argues that, "today we see the art of the past as nobody ever saw it before" because we look at art differently today than we did in the past. In the past, there were just the works of art, exactly how the artist made them. Now we have cameras and movies and so many different ways to reproduce works of art that they lose their original meaning. Berger says that when a piece of art is shown on television, it is seen by millions of different people in different places. It is taken out of its context and mixed with that of the person who is seeing it on television. Instead of being seen where it actually is, it is seen in people’s homes with all of their possessions and their lives and ideals. And it’s not just one person seeing it, it is millions of different people seeing the piece of art in a million different places and making millions of different interpretations of this single piece of art.
3) According to Berger, written text around a painting changes the text of the painting itself because the written text around the painting gives a different meaning to the text of the painting. Words around a painting are associated with the meaning of the painting, and therefore the words around a painting can define the painting itself. But the painting was not meant to be defined by words around it, it was meant to be defined by what people see when they look at it. Putting words around the painting gives it a meaning it was never supposed to have, simply because the words are close to the painting. Berger’s example of Van Gogh’s painting on page 28 is a great example. Looking at the painting without words around it, it seems kind of peaceful. But when the words about it being Van Gogh’s last painting before he killed himself are added, the painting almost seems kind of morbid.
4) I think mechanical reproduction has changed the way we see art because now we don’t have to leave our homes to see it. Art is no longer something that we want to see simply for the joy of seeing something beautiful, it has become something that we look at in our spare time if we have nothing else to do. We do not appreciate art the way we used to. I believe this is because we can see it, all of it, any time we want. And not only that, but we don’t have to interpret it for ourselves anymore. For every piece of art out there, whether it is a statue, a painting, a mobile, whatever, there are several written interpretations for it already, especially if you look at the piece of art on the internet or on television. All we have to do is pick which interpretation we like best. It’s a matching game now, nothing more. Oh sure, some people do still see art the way it should be seen, but 98% of the population does not, and it’s because they don’t have to anymore, thanks to mechanical reproduction.
1.) In what way is how we see the world affected by what we believe or know?
When we are young, our parents teach us how to behave and interact with our environment. Children often adopt the same beliefs that their parents have because that is simply what they are used to and have not been exposed to other beliefs. What we believe about our world affects our feelings and motivations and behaviors. The way we perceive the world is all we know. Perception is reality.
What we know affects how we see the world because the more we know about everything that we see and take in, the more sound and informed our judgments will be.
2.) Why does Berger argue, "today we see the art of the past as nobody ever saw it before"?
This concept is about perspective. Perspective in European art focused everything on the eye of the beholder. “Everything converges on to the eye as to the vanishing point of infinity. The visible world is arranged for the spectator as the universe was once thought to be arranged for God (pg 16).”
The invention of the camera changed perspective. “The camera showed that the notion of time passing was inseparable from the experience of the visual (pg 18).”
3.) According to Berger, how does actual written text around a painting change the text of the painting itself?
“The image now illustrates the sentence (pg 28).” When I looked at the example of the Van Gogh painting the second time, my whole perspective shifted. This connects to the first question, about what you know affecting what you see. If I hadn’t known the proximity the painting had to Van Gogh’s suicide, my thoughts about it wouldn’t have changed.
4.) Do you think mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art? How? Why?
The mechanical reproduction of art has a strong connection with consumerism. I doubt Michelangelo intended images from the Sistine Chapel be mass produced on wall calendars, posters, mugs and mousepads. Many people see art only through consumer’s eyes and do not absorb the culture and history of it.
Reproduced images of paintings simply lose much of their intended depth and meanings. Looking at paintings in art books doesn’t compare to seeing them up close at a museum.
However, it is obviously not possible for everyone to just pick up and go see exhibits whenever they please. Mechanical reproduction does have a purpose – to be able to study art. Even though it may not have been the intent of the artists, it is serving a purpose.
1. What we believe and know affects the way we see the world because those factors are what determine our individual realities. What we have learned and been taught about how to perceive things around us is unique to each person, everyone sees the world a different way.
2. We perceive art differently today because it is so available to us and reprinted in basically every form imaginable. Having that access and exposure causes the original art and the idea behind it to lose some of its unique and special power, it becomes less appreciated because it is around so much.
3. Written text around a painting can influence or even completely change the way someone views the painting. It can tell you what to think about the painting before allowing you to study, feel, and decide for yourself what the painting is about. It can completely change the power and feeling of the art itself, instead of seeing the painting, you see the painting the way the text wants you to see it.
4. Yes, mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art. Reprints and reproductions have made art more accessible to more people. You do not have to travel to museums, you can order off of ebay. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it has changed the way art is seen to many people.
By: Emily Moore...i hope this works because im confused as to how this really works, not gonna lie
1. Dominant ideologies create our perception in all aspects of life. One's religion, ethnicity, and even social class, play into one's ideologies. All these factors and more affect how one percieves the world even if it is inaccurate. For example, if one grew up in a non diverse community, one may think others that are different are inferior.
2. According to Berger, he argues "we see art of the past as nobody ever saw it before" because of perspective. Berger argues that before in European times the focus of art was centered. Now, through reproduction, cameras and movies provide a more broad view. This makes people think about the whole picture or concept.
3. Written text around a painting change the text or intent of the painting. When a painting has text, the images argue the intent or point of the artist. Berger states "The words have quoted the paintings to confirm thier own verbal authority." ( Berger 28). The painting now reflects the text, confirming the artist's intent.
4. Mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art tremendously. Because of different ideologies, commercial and even political use, are has been interpreted and altered original meanings.
1. The way we see something is dependent on what we know about that object and how we associate it with other things. The things we believe change our perception of the world.
2. Now we have other images such as pictures and videos. Where as, in the past there was only art. This allows us to see the subject of the artwork, which draws comparisons and flaws in the art.
3. The text tells you what to see. The image of the painting becomes less of what you think the painting looks like and more what the text says it looks like.
4. Yes. No longer do you have to travel thousands of miles to see a famous artwork. It makes the art much more accessible, but sometimes, less spectacular.
Shawn Finney
1. If we know or believe in something, then that is how we react towards it. For Hitler and Germany during WWII, they believed that white, blonde and blue eyes were a more evolved race and tried to exterminate all the people of any Jewish background. In the Olympics he had held, an African American won many of the track events.
2. The perception of art is always changing. What is “in” today may not be in next year. What we know no as normal, was not close to what normal was hundreds of years ago, not even ten years ago.
3. writing around the painting leaves less room for me to wonder. They say a picture is worht a thousand words. But if the words are already up there, the worth is already shown.
4. It has changed how we see art. Me being able to see a painting on tv or the internet, kind of diminishes the sheer wow factor when you see a real masterpiece in person. I do not get the opportunity of hearing about a great piece and traveling to go see it before I see it somewhere randomly.
1. We view the world with our eyes,but that is backed up with our brain. When we see something, we automatically apply our own morals and ideas to what is being seen. Different people have different ideas on life, which leads to different viewpoints.
2. Berger argues this because the world is dramatically different than it was in the past. In the past, no one ever looked at it like we do now because they knew different things and saw the world different than we do today.
3. Written text may completely change the painting. One may look at a piece of art, and see something entirely different than what is written about it. But after reading the text, their viewpoint may have changed to what is being said.
4. I think it depends on the person as to wether mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art. Some people will always have an independent mindset and not follow what is being said about the art. But others, like myself, aren't very creative and can see the viewpoint of what is being written about the artwork.
Rachel Post
1.) In what way is how we see the world affected by what we believe or know?
There is a disconnect between what we see and what we know because what we see is affected by our “way of seeing.” Our way of seeing is greatly influenced by what we know.
2.) Why does Berger argue, "today we see the art of the past as nobody ever saw it before"?
Each person’s individual way of seeing affects how he or she perceives an image; therefore every person perceives an image differently. “History always constitutes the relation between a present and its past” (Berger 11). A person’s knowledge about the present must affect their perception of the past.
3.) According to Berger, how does actual written text around a painting change the text of the painting itself?
Berger wrote that written text undoubtedly changes the meaning of a painting, because the image illustrates the written text. The written text establishes a sort of authority, and at least somewhat affects the image, whether it strongly overpowers it or merely somewhat affects it.
4.) Do you think mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art? How? Why?
I don’t think that mechanical reproduction has changed how we see art, but how we value art, in a monetary sense. It is of no consequence to the consumer to see a reproduction versus the original. The visual perception will be the same.
1. Different beliefs lead to different perceptions of the world. For example, people outside the United States or even some within it look down on America and its people as arrogant people who will do what they want, while most think it is the greatest country in the world.
2. Over time people's beliefs and culture have changed and thus the paintings are viewed differently.
3. The text around the paintings can influence how the viewer perceives the painting. The person will not figure out the meaning of the painting entirely on their own.
4. I don't think it has changed the way that we see art, but I do think that it has simply allowed a larger audience to be able to view art. For example in this book since the art was reproduced into the book. The only downside may be that with the mass production of art, the original may lose some of its originality and uniqueness.
1. The way we see the world is affected by what we believe or know because our beliefs depict what we expect to see and the things we know affect those beliefs.
2. Overtime things change and new meanings portray, giving things such as art new interpretations that in the past no one saw or knew.
3. A painting itself can portray many meanings, but when written text is added to a painting it gives the viewer a limit to what they are suppose to be able to see. Making the viewer know what the painting means taking away the whole interpreted art deal.
4. I do believe it is has changed how we see art because art isn't spouse to be mass produced like in the day of Leonardo Di Vinci how his paintings had so much more significance because there was only one copy giving the art more value keeping it sacred to the beholder.
1. We see the world and recognize the facts we already know, but it can never really be explained. We only see what we look at, which is a matter of choice. If we believe in one thing, we associate images around us with that belief, whether positive or not. Compared to the past, overall people view things differently, and now, like in the past, we create explanations for those perceptions.
2. Today, we've seen the art of the past like no one has because our perception has completely altered. They no longer contains authority or uniquness. It changed from bringing the spectators to the painting to be the other way around. The invention of the camera was also a drastic step in this change.
3. By including written text with a painting, it leaves little room for the viewer to image or create their own meaning. Most of the time, the reason is unknown however. Also, "reproduced paintings, like all other information, have to hold their own against all the other information being continually transmitted."
4. I think mechanical reproduction has changed the way we view art somewhat. The pieces that arep placed with a high cost are often bought and looked at, but the meaning totally overlooked. You can still find the emotion when staring at a painting no matter how many times it was reproduced. If reproduction of art didnt exist, we could not learn about the past or art history. It is a good aspect of learning and education today.
Post a Comment