Ways of Seeing

I recently watched the first episode of "Ways of Seeing" presented by John Berger which was made and shown at the same time the book was released in 1972. He discusses the assumptions people make when looking at a painting as it has changed radically over the years since the ability to reproduce the paintings has come about, via the camera. Before the camera and the mass reproductions of paintings there was you and the painting in a room, that's it. And then came along the camera which gave people the accessibility to look at paintings. John Berger discusses that because something is lost between the viewer and being able to see the original. When looking at a painting you feel its presence, its sense of history and place, a time unknown by many as it has longed since past but it brought back into your time. And in museums these painting are situated to make you look and become personal with the original, its context is within the museum. What I found interesting in the programme was this sense of place and context. Berger demonstrated how if a painting is placed in a church it holds a completely different feel if its hung on a bedroom wall. If you do have reproductions, it becomes part of the environment and its meaning therefore adapts radically. Appearances of paintings could travel across the world and you weren't the only one looking and interpreting them. When you look at a painting in a museum Berger describes the "uninterrupted silence" that is created which is soundless. I feel this too, recently I visited Paris and went to museums such as The Louvre, Orangerie Museum, Musee D'Orsay and one artist who is mentioned in the episode Vincent Van Gogh after seeing his work in "real life" at the Musee D'Orsay changed my whole view on him. In reproductions you get this tiny little JPEG on your screen that you print and stick in your book and write about and you don't get the chance to experience what the painter is saying. How they've painted. Why have they used these techniques? What are they trying to say? One painting I saw really changed my perception of Van Gogh.

The Siesta by Vincent Van Gogh 1889

Before I saw this Painting, I had studied works of Van Gogh before and hadn't really appreciated them fully. When I came to the section dedicated to his work I became lost in his work, everything surrounding me faded as me and this painting connected and I was seeing a production made by this man over a hundred years ago. There's nothing quite like seeing a painting and then seeing a replica of it, even looking at the image above gives you no where near the same feeling as what you get from almost being able to touch it. Context and this sense of place manipulates the meaning and makes it into something else. As you walk around this darkly lit room seeing his work you really got a sense of his life and the sadness that he unfortunately had to endure. When I came back I became so inspired by him and studied further and to me having that effect on a person is what an artist works for. All he ever wanted was acceptance and all he ever got was rejection. He was alienated and now there have been suggestions that his characteristics were something similar to someone suffering with Bipolar disorder but back then the understanding of these difficulties were not around. 

One last thing I liked about the episode was Berger's encouragement of being sceptical. Even about what he was saying.

"I Hope you consider what I have arranged, but be sceptical"

It is so refreshing to hear an artist and art critic say those sweet words! Art is subjective. Yet there is this massive pressure to please and understand and be right. Who knows what the real meaning of any work is unless the artist has actually written it down? Art is an interpretation of how the artist perceives the world and its issues. Its frustrating especially as you go through the education system having studied Art and Photography at A level, a foundation in art and design and now a degree how some teachers, not all, say your work is your own unique creation that must be thought out properly but its an interpretation, and then mark you down because you haven;t interpreted it "right". I get it, if the system was run like that everyone would be leaving with A's and I must have done something right as I did leave with an A and distinction but there is a hint of hypocrisy about art and art critics that say it is your interpretation, well who are you to tell me my work is wrong? I made it for me not for you, you are just here to sooth my ego and give me money or destroy my reputation and take it away. Throughout the blogs I keep coming across all the hardships that being an artist I have and will have to endure. Does it stop me? Never.

Overall, I feel I have related to significantly to what Berger has said and will watch further episodes to learn more. One interesting thing is the time it was presented in the early 1970's and yet how much it has become relevant to our time if not more so now with the rapid development of technology.Until next time...