With the creation of the camera we are able to see things that we do not have in front of us. It gives us the possibility to see art work which could be miles away from us. But not everything is good about the usage of the camera. People are able to reproduce images and add or change things in a painting which is the case of the “meme”. American Gothic by Grant Wood was vandalize by whoever created this meme. As Berger described in the video, it is true that the real meaning is in the eye of the beholder. To me this painting looks as a support for farmers, maybe I am wrong. Also, thanks to the camera and the creation of this meme the painting became popular but what if Wood would not agree with what others have done to his work? Art is already losing it’s meaning by being reproduced by others. This people are creating a business using other people’s job. As I said before, art is a way to express our feeling and I consider that it is disrespectful to create a meme out of such a valuable painting which has been created to be admired and analyzed at a silent and still wall of a museum.
Category Archives: Posts
Blog Post 2
In the first picture called The Scream, it shows us as a horrible feeling, so the painting back then wasn’t describing an emotion as accurately as a meme whenever we look at it, it is up to our interpretation. However, nowadays we do use a meme picture in a text message to show our emotions. for instance, the meme picture shows us this Phoebe from Friends yelling, so whenever this picture is used, the context of the conversation provides the meaning. Through memes, classical art can be redesigned as modern “art” for the people of today.
discussion #2
- One of the first points John Berger makes is that the act of seeing something is not as objective as we might at first think. Instead, he argues that what we see is conditioned by habits and conventions. What does Berger mean when he says that the process of seeing is not “natural,” that it is shaped by habits and conventions? What kinds of habits and conventions shape the ways we see and how do they do this?
To argue what we see is not objective at first, Berger has used several painting. He has demonstrated well known painting by Goya. Often we see things in context of what the narrator say. What we know or believe affects the way we see things. Also even we start with seeing and recognition , our past experience and knowledge changes the way we see things. He also mentions that the meaning of a painting shown on films can be changed even more radically. He has presented one painting by Brueghel ”The Road to Calvary” in which we see mourners of Christ. All we can see that is grief, torture and despair. But as the camera zoomed in for more details, it looks more like a devotional pictures. That means external factors like environment, the presentation, the technology belief and religion interprets what we see is different from what we understand.
- How does Berger describe the term “perspective”? How does the concept of artistic perspective make “the eye the center of the visible world” and why is this significant when we think about what artworks like paintings mean for viewers?
Berger describes the term “perspective” as where and when we see something will affect what we see. The perspective of children and adults looking at painting are different. Berger mentions how people perspective is changing because of camera. The camera can reproduce images in any size, anywhere for different purposes. The painting on our wall or in religious place is influenced by the context of our life and the other object placed around. Stillness and silence of the painting help us to feel the uniqueness without being diverted by foreign factors.
- According to Berger, how has the camera changed our sense of perception? How has this device brought paintings and other images into the context of our lives? How does this differ from attitudes toward art that existed before the camera was invented?
As Berger said Botticelli’s Venus and Mars used to be unique. It was possible to see only in its original hanging place. As he said paintings which are still can only be in one place at one time The original is silent .The painters emotion and creation can be seen establishing relationship between painting and viewer .But camera can reproduce it in any size and anywhere for different purposes. Camera has changed the way how we see the things and what we see. It has changed how we see the old paintings that are unique .The same paintings can be seen in different places for different purposes at same time .Now the reproduced painting is seen in context of observers eye. It is affected by the environment and people around there. The reproduced painting lacks its uniqueness.
blog #1
In the short film “how art can help analyze” used three intellectual standard, accuracy, clarity and depth. First clarity, throughout the video the presenter express the message very clear and understandable . The presenter stick his point “study of art can analyze things better ” and give example on real life situation such as how art can help investigate criminals, how nurses and doctor get helps understand better situation of the patient issues. Furthermore, through those example, presenter accurately explained and prove his point “how study of art can help analyze things better”. `
Narrator also share how art can be deep if we analyze it better, through the example of painting. first the narrater describe the the obvious things that can observe at glance, then later show how better analyzing can show more detail of that art.
Berger’s Ways of Seeing and Starry Night abused
Van Gogh’s Starry Night is one of the most famous and recognizable paintings in the world. Its value is priceless and seeing in the Museum of Modern Art in New York City is truly a magical sensation. Berger explains this is partly due to its monetary value. This may be true, but to see it in its silence and stillness, after seeing it everywhere from books to coffee mugs, the real thing transcends just its rarity and authenticity. Starry Night has a brilliance in it’s dark contrasting colors and brushstrokes that are lost in most prints. Berger correctly explains how photography has changed that. Now art can be used or abused as its own language by someone other than the artist. I think John would shudder to see the effects of not just photography but now years after his video, Photoshop and the ability to not only reproduce but severely alter an image into a completely different image. In this ‘meme’ Starry Night has been altered as a joke to make people laugh on the internet. It has been photoshopped so someone can increase their social media presence. Van Gogh painted this scene in a severe depression in a mental hospital. He never intended for his painting to be used as a language of humor. Berger uses the camera as the culprit for this trend of manipulation of art, but I’d argue it goes well beyond the camera. It’s modern technology that is the true offender. If Berger had experienced the digital world, he would see art being metamorphized not just by its context but by actual true digital manipulation. He would see his theory proven to an extreme he never imagined when he filmed this 40-50 years ago. Images today’s day are so accessible to manipulation that anybody with a computer can abuse art for their own purpose. It has ultimately changed the value of visual art and stripped it of its original meaning.
Discussion #2
Part 1. By saying that seeing is not natural and that it is shaped by habit and conventions Berger means that what we see is not just the object or image itself but rather our view or mindset of the image or object we are looking at. Our view or mindset is influenced by many things some of which are our environment, our upbringing, our societal status, our age, our gender, our mental state and society’s opinion on how we are supposed to view and perceive something. The list can go on and on and it is basically the sum total of our experiences in life and society’s norms which influence how we view or see things. And because of this, different people will view the same piece of art differently.
Part 2. According to Berger the camera has changed our senses of perception because now we could not only see things that we could never see before, but we could also see them in different ways. Regarding artwork the camera could reproduce images in any size, anywhere and for any purpose. As for the “stillness” and “silence”, which he attributes to viewing art in a museum, what he means is that this experience goes beyond just what people teach about art. In fact he goes on to say that it seems that viewing art in this manner connects the moment in time the painting represents with the moment in time in which you are viewing it. He then adds that this experience almost makes one question how we measure time itself. He also says the reason why this type of viewing is different from seeing art in a book or on screen is because the latter two mediums are never still, and always moving.
Part 3. By saying reproductions of paintings can become a form of information Berger is saying that the images can be used to convey a certain idea or narrative. This information could be further manipulated by what comes before, along side or after the images. He then goes on to say that this type of manipulation can be seen as talking. The images and how they’re presented could be seen as words in a dialogue used for many different purposes. Some of these purposes may include selling something, promoting an idea or movement, or educating people.
D.Q2 – 2
With the invention of a camera we are able to see things that are happening or happened some place else. The camera allows us to see art but it gives us a different point of view of a painting. For example, it is not the same to see art in the gallery then to see a recording of the paintings in the internet. The same happens when we see examples of paintings on books, we just see an image but we do not interpret the image as we should. Art is a way of expression for artist and if we are not able to see and analyze an authentic painting than the artist work was in vain.
D.Q2 – 1
John Berger argues that the way we see art depend in our habits and conventions. Not everyone has the same thoughts when see art, some people may see some details that others won’t see. Now this is how habits influence in the way we see painting. For example, Berger presented some art to explain how a different perspective can change the meaning on a painting. If I go to the museum to see painting, The virgin of the rocks by Leonardo Da Vinci, in the original painting I will be able to see every single detail in the picture because it is located in its original place. But if I get a copy of this painting not all the details will be included neither its authenticity. also the environment will change the whole meaning of the image.
Discussion question #2
New Post!
About Posts
This is a Post. Instructors often post announcements, assignments, and discussion questions for for students to comment. Some instructors have students post assignments. Posts are listed on the “Posts” page with the newest at the top.
Post Comments are turned on by default (see Home for information on Comments).
Add/Remove a password from this post from the Post Editor > Visibility > Edit > Password Protected.
Add/Edit/Delete a post from Dashboard > Posts
