Discuss how you feel one can apply the concepts presented by Berger in looking at the Modern Art exhibition at MOMA?

John Berger, in “Ways of Seeing”, presents several points on perspective and its distinct characteristic of centering everything on the “eye of the beholder” (Berger 16). It is a concentrated beam of light that travels inward instead of out, making the eye the “vanishing point of infinity” (16). Although a little drastic, Berger is quite accurate in describing how the general masses perceive, or at least should perceive, art. In order to get the most out of a piece of art (a painting in this case), one has to focus in on the painting, and only the painting alone. Every brush stroke, blend of color, position of foreground and background has a meaning and it is our duty as art appreciators to try and determine what those meanings are. This is no easy feat, because everyone’s mind is on a different track, and so interpretations will differ on all levels.

My visit to the MOMA with my partner and fellow classmates proved Berger’s ideas above and the idea that people think and perceive differently. As we looked at paintings together, we found ourselves taking everything in, from the colors, to the subject matter, even to the random speck of paint on the bottom right corner that may or may not have been intentional. The paintings projected themselves into our vision as we did our best to come together and make sense of what we were seeing. I will apply Berger’s method on future visits to the MOMA and to other museums in general, but I will do it with others. I think learning about art as a collective group is easier because what starts out as random snippets of thought in the corners of my mind can become fruitful discussions when put together with the ideas of others.

Jana

Discuss how you feel one can apply the concepts presented by Berger in looking at the Modern Art exhibition at MOMA?

John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing” is a detailed look on how people view art. In this book, Berger discusses the different perspectives of art based on time period. He compares the perspectives of the past to the perspectives of the present and states that the change in these perspectives had to do with the “reproduction” of many paintings. Paintings in the past were viewed and prized highly because back then, paintings were the only way to capture an image. Most of the time, only the elite and high class could view it. In modern times however, new developments such as the camera made it so that paintings weren’t the only way view and capture an image.

The invention of the camera allowed for the reproduction of paintings. In the past, only the elite could view paintings, and now, anyone can see a painting which changes the way people view that painting. Reproductions of paitnings such as The Starry Night (Vincent van Gogh), Mona Lisa (Leonardo Da Vinci) andWater Lilies (Claude Monet) can be viewed anywhere, such as postcards, posters etc.

As I went to the Modern Museum of Art and viewed the paintings, there were times when i thought, “wow how is this considered art?” Berger’s book however, made me realize that I come from a different era than most of the artists and that back then, people had different views and values. Berger believes that reproductions sometimes makes a painting lose its value because it is appears everywhere, however I have seen reproductions many times and seeing paintings such as Van Gogh’s The Starry Night and Monet’s Water Lilies in real life still left me awe struck.

-Stella Chin

Discuss how you feel one can apply the concepts presented by Berger in looking at the Modern Art exhibition at MOMA?

I think one of the most interesting things in Berger’s book is that the writer suddenly shifts the spotlight on the painter. He talks about how many art historians usually attempt to give meaning to the way an artist portrays its subjects, interpreting every detail and imagining the reactions of the public to such details. Berger, though, gives the suggestion to picture that artist behind the canvas, its mood and feelings, and how they knew what their duty was-how they were supposed to paint the scene.

Another interesting point that Berger made was about time and space in which a piece of art is set into. This gives way to reflecting about reproductions but also original pieces, which have all been equally stripped of their original time and space dimensions. One might think how suddenly inappropriate would a Picasso’s masterpiece be on someone’s shirt, but then Berger claims that even museums deprive the pieces of their original location meaning and mood.

Now, going to MoMA with all of these new interesting concepts and ideas in mind, I closely looked at each painting with a different eye. I tried to look at the date of the art I was looking at, picturing it in the original location-a church, a private villa, a yard-and I could perceive a totally different tone and meaning out of the piece. Sometimes even the colors changed, and certain objects resonated with the original environment. Unfortunately, most of the pieces at MoMA did not include where they were supposed to be, or if I wasn’t familiar with the artist I just could not get a sense where it was even crafted. Definitely, knowing all of these things now make me acknowledge my ignorance in this sense and encourage me to research further into the time and space dimensions of a painting when I try to really get a meaning out of it.

Sara

Discuss how you feel one can apply the concepts presented by Berger in looking at the Modern Art exhibition at MOMA?

John Berger mentions many different approaches or methods to consider when looking at art, even if at a Modern Art exhibition at MoMA. He mentions, “we can see, we are aware that we can also be seen” (Berger 9).  This helps to emphasize the concept of perspective in all art. When looking at a photograph, Berger suggests trying to understand how the photographer wanted to capture an image and what he/she saw as well as what is being displayed to us in a photograph. The intention of the artist should be accompanied by the art in front of us. An artwork can consist of a person staring at us from an artwork and trying to perceive the image from the person in the artwork can help us understand its role in a piece. What did the artist want to convey with this person in the image? While looking at some of the artwork at MoMA, the paintings and sculptures should be examined not merely by what is on display but also the purpose of the pieces.

Another point that Berger emphasizes is that reproductions of paintings do not parallel the real works of art. He states, “all reproductions more or less distort, and that therefore the original painting is still in a sense unique” (20). The reproductions do not show each stroke or groove in an artwork. Many paintings, such as Starry Night, embody texture in the work, which cannot be captured in a two-dimensional photograph or reproduction. Also, the experience of looking at the painting in the museum in person, up-close conjures up a whole different set of ideas, feelings, and thoughts that a mere reproduction cannot evoke.

The concept of perspective and understanding that a reproduction is not merely enough helps us reevaluate our experiences at MoMA. The perspective from us looking into the painting should only be one of many perspectives considered when trying to understand art. A reproduction does not give justice to a painting and looking at any painting at MoMA should consist of observing and appreciating all the details an artist put into their work that cannot be seen from anywhere else.