Summary/Analysis of John Berger’s Ways of Seeing
In general terms, it might seem that “looking” and “seeing” are synonyms, are interchangeable terms used to describe one’s perception by the eye. But when it comes to art, the two words could not be more different. To look at something is to glance at it, to notice a few details here and there; in other words, looking at something is superficial. Seeing a work of art, on the other hand, as John Berger implies, means not just to observe it, but also to understand it, to go beyond the surface and delve into a world nonexistent to the “looking” eye. As the title of his book denotes, John Berger has mastered this art of seeing art, so to speak, and goes to great lengths to describe not only how seeing has evolved throughout the years, but also the nature in which certain subjects (primarily women) are seen in the art world.
In the first chapter of Ways of Seeing, Berger discusses how we see art differently today than we did in the past, and it’s all thanks to one burgeoning institution: technology. Traditionally, paintings, just like the human eye, are stationary and static: they’re only in one place, at one time. But the advent of the camera throws this one-dimensionality out the window. When it focuses in on a work, a camera reproduces it, rendering it available in any size, anywhere. And for many people, this “anywhere” is in fact in the context of one’s own life. For example, in the past, da Vinci’s “Virgin of the Rocks” might be seen in a Renaissance art gallery, alongside some other similarly-themed pieces. But now it can be seen in a million different places, in any room, with any people, on a laptop or a TV or a phone or a poster. Stillness has been replaced by portability, immobility has been supplanted by motility, and it’s all thanks to the reproductive nature of the camera.
And while one might think it beneficial that works of art are now so readily accessible, the truth is that this new technology-driven reproduction of art makes each piece’s original meaning more ambiguous, and “destroys its unique original meaning.” Take again the example of cameras, which are able to easily manipulate by movement the naturally silent and still paintings. By focusing on certain parts of the painting, and ignoring others entirely, it shows the audience what it, or the person controlling the device, so chooses; it can crop and cut and edit and censor as it pleases. Berger uses the example of Breughel’s “Procession to Calvary,” which can be manipulated by the camera to show only characters and situations that seem religious in nature to give off the impression that the painting is a pious one, when it, in fact, is not. Thus the camera tells us what to see, what to look at – privileges and powers that ought to belong solely to the artist.
In the third chapter of the book, Berger discusses the nature of how women are seen in art, an oft-negative portrayal he asserts is due in large part to patriarchy and misogyny. And the primary offender of this sexist view is the nude painting. A woman is, in the culture of privileged Europeans, deemed as nothing more than a “sight,” an object that exists solely for the pleasure of the male audience. And what better way to please the men than to show them in their most innocent, vulnerable state: clothesless. “Nakedness,” Berger asserts, “is a sign of her submission to the owner’s feelings or demands” (p.52).
Indeed women are often portrayed in art to be subservient to men, a quality that is even evoked by the facial expressions of the women in subject. Whether looking at a traditional renaissance oil painting or a contemporary photograph, when it comes to women in nude art, there is almost a universal look on a woman’s face – it’s one, as Berger states, “of responding with calculated charm at the man who is looking at her.” She’s almost always looking out at the man whom she is to serve, the man whom she exists to please, and letting him know that she is his, and only his. Take for example Von Aachen’s painting, “Ceres and Cupid.” Behind the naked woman is situated what appears to be a male lover, but her attention is certainly not directed towards him. Rather, her head is turned around, is turned towards her “true lover,” the spectator. Additionally, in many paintings, nude women are often portrayed as indolent and lethargic, shown sitting or resting or doing anything conducive to inactivity. This is because women were supposed to feed an appetite, to satisfy the desires of their superiors – not to have any of their own. Indeed, women’s expressions and sexuality needs to be downplayed as much as possible so as to emphasize the male sexuality, to assert that the man is the important one, the man is the one in control.
