What is art? No two people are going to have the same definition.  Just as one says that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the same applies to art. While one person might be confused by an abstract painting, another can easily spot the meaning within. Art might take on different forms and meanings, but the key is always in the perspective of the viewer. In their respective novels, both John Berger and Alice Elizabeth Chase discuss the different ways we look at art and how we come to these different viewpoints.

In her novel Looking at Art, Chase discusses the perspective of early artists. From the very beginning, humans used art based off of sight. Some of the earliest art pieces were maps of landscapes made by the ancient Egyptians. In fact, most art in older times was primarily of landscapes. The Romans did it out of sheer appreciation for the natural beauty of the world around them, whereas the Chinese used the landscape to depict a form of reverence for their gods. Artists began to set up a sort of formula for painting landscapes. Early art became very methodical, until they realized art is so much more than what you see. It is a combination of what you see and how it makes you feel. It became, and still is, a picture of sight that holds the power to evoke emotions and sense memories, which brings the reader to a more modern view of art that Berger discusses.

Just like Chase, Berger claims sight is fundamental to our understanding of the world in his novel Ways of Seeing. We can see and feel things before we can put them into words. He claims though, that we don’t just see things as they are anymore. We look at how everything works together in a larger picture with respect to not only the objects within the picture, but also in respect to ourselves. Berger also claims that images are just are just our way of reconstructing something seen in the past. An artist’s creation is a reflection of how they see that image. When we look at an image or painting, we study every aspect about it before we draw conclusions from it. We look at when it was created, what was going on in the world at the time, who made it, etc. We change our current perspective to fit that of the artist’s. So art is not a representation of the physical world, but a more holistic representation of how we see things.

As perspectives of art shift, so do the techniques used to create it. Chase describes how early art did not account for accuracy in the details. For example, drawings of buildings or of people did not show distance changing within the scene. It was very one dimensional, until artists began to focus on the relationship between the image and the viewer. The Middle Ages brought forth the idea of a vanishing point, which the scholars of the Renaissance expanded upon through the study of architecture. It allows for the viewer to get the impression that the picture moves together towards a central focal point.

Berger focuses less on the techniques used to pull the viewer into the painting and more on how the viewer relates back to what is depicted in the image. He discusses how the detail of the background of the painting correlates to the values of the people of the time. In the Middle Ages, the more objects that surrounded the central figure, the more he or she owned. It was a sign of wealth. He also discussed how women in pictures are objects to the viewer. They pose in the way that will look best to the person looking at the photo. It is more about the signs of detail that speak to the viewer as opposed to Chase’s argument that the viewer is pulled in by the realistic shapes within the image.

There is no set way in which someone should look at art. Art is all about perspective. However the artist sees the world will affect how he or she will choose to represent it. Early artists saw the world just as it was, so that was exactly how they chose to draw it. As they developed a more complex understanding of the world and how we see it, so did their drawings. Art is an area in life that is constantly changing and will continue to grow, but how we choose to see it is a decision we must make on our own.

Art novelists Alice Elizabeth Chase and John Berger discuss in their respective novels, which share similar and different opinions, the idea of viewing art and the artist’s and viewer’s perspective when observing art. In Looking at Art, Alice Elizabeth Chase describes the idea that artists must confine what they see to the limits of his or her own canvas and the artist’s purpose in painting. John Berger states in Ways of Seeing his feelings on the impact of photography on appreciation of art from the past and the viewer’s understanding when looking at art.

Alice Elizabeth Chase details in her novel, Looking at Art, the ideals of viewing art and the artist’s perspective when transcribing his art. In her book, Chase describes the concept that artists must confine what they see to the limits of his or her own canvas. The artist must then use his eyes to see and convert his observation into man’s feelings and thoughts about the subject. Such artists the author delved into, such as the Egyptians, Chinese, and Ancient Romans, used their art medium as a way to document how the world exists at the present moment, in their own eyes. For example, an artist paints a landscape and details the aspects of the entire scenery to what he deems necessary for his artwork to be a success.

John Berger states in Ways of Seeing his feelings on the impact of photography on appreciation of art from the past. He regards the meaning of art as how viewers perceive it at the present time. The author feels that the introduction of new technology, such as the camera, and the capability to mass produce a piece of artwork, takes away from the original meaning and value behind the creation of the piece art. Berger discusses that photography of artwork prevents the audience from seeing the true nature and meaning of the original piece of artwork for it is merely a copy and not the original.

Alice Elizabeth Chase and John Berger regard perception of art differently, in that they believe the meaning or perception of art comes from different eras. Berger does not view the idea of perspective as confined in time as Chase does. Chase follows the notion that the meaning of a piece of artwork is in the eye of the creator when the painting was first completed. Berger deems the thoughts about and main purpose of a piece of work now lies with the beholder at any given time, such as the viewer at present day.

In their respective novels, both artists do see eye to eye regarding perception of multiple individuals and space. Berger understands whether it be observing a photograph of a piece of artwork or viewing a painting in person, each individual focuses his or her attention on one aspect of a painting. From that, a person may interpret the meaning of piece of art differently than someone else. Chase grasps that in painting landscape artists capture a large span of scenery and viewers still hone in on specific aspects. The two also notice a parallel between time and place. As Chase points out in Looking a Art, landscape painting was very popular in early art done by the Romans, Egyptians, and Chinese. And so in this era, artists become very scenery oriented. Berger finds a parallel when discussing the 15^th century and the sudden importance in the tradition of celebrating personal possessions in artwork.

John Berger, in his book and documentary “Ways of Seeing” delves into the history and influence of art, and how the work has transformed. “Looking at Art” by Alice Elizabeth Chase has a similar intention, as it outlines the importance of perspective and the formation of interpretation throughout time. These art critics and novelists portray a similar message concerning the value “seeing” art, yet through the use of different examples.

Berger states that “The act of seeing is active; it is an act of choice.” From this is cast the idea that everyone sees things differently, as everything is open to personal interpretation and influence. The more technical aspect of this action is broached by Chase, who says, “It is not possible to limit vision to any one scientific scheme. We have two eyes, we move our heads; we shift our glance; we walk around. What is exactly accurate for a single eye fixed at a point is not accurate for the restless human eye.” The notion that not only the way we see something, in the physical sense, but the way we really “see” something in an influential way, differs is noted by both these authors; something which has been developed through time and experience.

Another aspect to consider when thinking about art, and its appreciation is to note the time and era in which the piece was created. Chase comments that, “If the modern spectator finds himself a little bored by the painting, it is partly because taste changes. Today we seek something other than superb technical skill.” Taste does not just change from individual to individual, but corporately as well, as artistic periods form; several noted by Berger: renaissance, impressionists and cubists movements.

With the vast options of seeing and interpreting, the artist is also able to showcase his work in such a way to highlight or focus on specific areas which he would like the spectator to notice. Although photography is the most realistic form of art, Chase comments that “Representing things in this way may not be true to what the eye sees, but it often shows what is going on better than a photograph could.” Artists often change their idea of realism in order to pin point a certain matter or issue which the artist would like brought to attention. In the same breath, the majority can form a meaning or interpretation, as Berger notes, “When images from the past are presented as works of art, their meanings are obscured by learnt assumptions such as beauty, truth, form etc.” Without the conscious knowledge, everyone approaches art with preconceived notions or ideas.

The fantastic thing about art is that we in are no way constrained to our perceptions, but we can rather change or broaden our reaction to different works, as Chase articulates, “New ways of seeing, can sharpen our perception, and can give us a deeper and ricer sense of the relation of nature and man.” From this, stem endless possibilities.

The freedom of interpretation in art is not just available to the spectator, but even more so the artist. Within her essay, Chase hones in on the art of landscapes, and notes that  “The scene is not a “view” at all, but a map, ” giving the artist complete freedom, as “ways of looking at it and painting it vary even more.” Even since the earliest recorded landscape, Chase states, “The landscapes were never real but rather the fanciful imaginings of city dwellers who think of the country as a bright and happy world remote from turmoil.” This again reinstates the endless view and interpretation of art, for both the artist and spectator.

Unlike Chase, Berger focuses on the nude, and its development through history, and the specific fact that it was created for the audience. Through the use of nudes, not just the way the painting is seen, but also how women are seen, is noted by Berger, “The nude reveals how women have been seen and judged as sights.” He develops, “To be naked is to be oneself. To be nude is to be seen naked by others and yet not recognized for oneself. A naked body has to be seen as an object in order to become a nude.” The nude has ben created with the purpose of pleasing the viewer, Berger states that “The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns herself into an object – and most particularly an object of vision: a sight.” In this instance the artist creates from a place of bringing pleasure to the spectator. With this in mind, the artist brings importance to the pieces of his work he thinks the spectator would most like to notice.

In his work, John Berger plows deeper into the dangerous world of commercial art, a debate which Chase prefers to steer clear from. Berger deploys the idea that “What determines an image’s value is not its meaning or quality of painting, but its uniqueness.” His dislike of photography, not the art, but its ability to copy any image, he believes detracts from the idea that art is sacred and completely unique. Berger also touches on the fact that commercial art has become so prevalent and ever changing in the world today. He also notes the emptiness of publicity and advertising and how it is a false promise. The idea that there is always more, always better. The envy that stems from this glamour, which is all rooted in instant gratification, often dilutes the importance of art and its effect. Berger then makes an interesting link between oil paintings and publicity; the private property, value and important owner-quality of it all. He also plays on the thought that this theme is intertwined into every area of our lives, “Money is life . . . in the sense that 
it is the token of and key to every human capacity. The power to spend money is the power to live.” Most importantly, is the “divorce from reality” which both oil paintings and publicity share; the idea of “what he is and what he would like to be.”

Alice Elizabeth Chase and John Berger both address the importance of “seeing” with regards to art. The artist’s perspective and intention, the viewer’s response and the influence of the work are all tackled. Chase and Berger use different examples and eras to make their point, yet the common idea that art is a vessel open to appreciation from people in all walks of life, roles and society, both spectators and creators, is evident.

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.