Ways of seeing by John Berger

For Christmas work we had to read different pieces of writing, one of which was John Berger's 'Ways of seeing'.

It was quite a difficult piece to read, and i found myself having to reread the same paragraphs over and over again to make sure i actually understood what was being said, but it was really interesting to read. It has definitely made me think about the way we see the world a lot more, as i have never considered any of the things he talks about until i read it.

Here are some notes i made while reading 'Ways of seeing':

-seeing comes before words

-there is an always-present gap between words and seeing

-the way we see things is affected by what we know/what we believe

-we never look at one thing- we look at the relation between things and ourselves.

-dialogue is an attempt to explain how 'you see things' and an attempt to discover how other people 'see things'

-an image is a sight which has been recreated or reproduced. Every images embodies a way of seeing - yet, our perception or appreciation of an image depends also upon our own way of seeing.

-an image can outlast what is represented, it then shows how something/body had once looked.

Rene Magritte - The Key of Dreams

-the camera isolated momentary appearances and in doing so destroyed the idea that images were timeless.

-'the uniqueness of every painting was once part of the uniqueness of the place where it resided. Sometimes the painting was transportable. But it couldn't be seen. in two places at the same times. When the camera reproduces a painting, it destroys the uniqueness of its image. As a result, its meaning changes. Or, more exactly, its meaning multiplies and fragments into many meanings.

-one might argue that all reproductions more or less distort, and that therefore the original painting is still in a sense unique.

-a unique existence is defined as an object whose value depends on its rarity. It's market price is said to be a reflection of its spiritual value.

-some pieces of art become famous because someone wants to buy it for a lot of money, Now the painting has acquired a new kind of impressiveness. Not because of what it shows, or the meaning of the image, but because of its market value.

-a film unfolds in time and a painting doesn't. In a film the way one image follows another constructs an argument which becomes irreversible. In a painting all its elements are there to be seen simultaneously. Paintings are ofter reproduced with words.

This is a landscape of a cornfield with birds flying out of it.

Then you turn the image and it says this:

It is hard to define exactly how the words have changed the image but undoubtedly they have. The image now illustrates the sentence.