Seeing the Interesting Thing About Art and

¶ … Seeing The interesting thing about art and artistic expression today is the many different ways in which it can be interpreted. Indeed, today's variety of cultures, perspectives, and means of communication lend themselves to a myriad of interpretations. Hence, essays such as "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger appear, at first glance, to cater well to this variety of interpretations. What is most interesting about the essay is that it appears, at first, to provide an interpretation of human perspective in general.

At the end of the essay, however, this purpose appears to be supplanted by a more exclusive, narrow viewpoint regarding the political nature of original and replicated art. To offer a more in-depth interpretation of the author's viewpoint, the purpose, claims, and "three perspectives" in terms of ethos, pathos, and logos will be considered. At the start of the essay, its purpose appears to be a consideration of the various ways in which people might see things. This is related, first, to the concept of image.

The author points out, quite correctly, that "Seeing comes before words" (p. 7). This means that the image is the primary interpretation of the world around us. Quite logically, the author follows an in-depth consideration of image and its meaning in terms of the human relationship to the world with a consideration of various visual art forms. At the end of the essay, however, this purpose appears to be subsumed by an exclusive focus on art before and after its replication.

The claims of the essay correlate well with its apparent purpose, although this does appear somewhat dual. First, the claim that vision precedes an awareness of words and writing is well supported by the way in which children perceive the world. The author notes that "The child sees and recognizes before it can speak." This is followed by a consideration of the vision offered by art, which in turn is followed by a consideration of how photography has changed the concept of perspective.

The author discusses art and the perception it implicates, at first, by a lengthy consideration of Frans Hals and two of his works depicting the "regents" of his time. From Hals's perspective, the author claims, a negative, non-neutral vision might be interpreted from his depiction, given the perspective of the artist as pauper. On the other hand, the perspective of the contemporary art critic would impose its own background and assumptions about art on the work.

The author then uses this as a basis for furthering the discussion regarding photography and the ways in which visual perspective shifted because of this new interpretive technology. Photography meant that art could be replicated, which shifted the meaning and value attached to works of original art. This could then be related to the ethos, pathos, and logos the author uses to expound his views. Ethos is related to the language the author uses to convince the reader of his viewpoint. This is the one consistency throughout the essay.

The author uses a level of academic language that his peers can relate to. As such, the work is aimed at a certain audience with an assumed intellectual prowess and power of critical thinking. Concepts such as the "compositional unity of a painting" (p. 13), for example, assumes that the reader will at least have access to this level of academic language. I believe, however, that this is also where the author makes his fundamental mistake.

Any reader with a relative amount of critical thinking skills will, I believe, begin to frown towards the end of the essay. Why spend so much time and energy on considering the ideas of perspective to conclude with something as relatively simplistic as the fact that "original art is political?" Pathos refers to the author's ability to move the reader emotionally. While there is at least one emotionally moving example within this lengthy essay, I do not believe that emotional appeal lies at the fundamental persuasion strategies of the essay.

Having said this, what I find most emotionally persuasive element about the essay is the author's use of Frans Hals. Berger points out that the author writing about this work interprets it in a way that is completely divorced from what is known, little though it is, about Hals and those who commissioned him to paint the works in question.

I cannot help to be emotionally moved by Hals' situation, as an old man forced to take whatever commissions he can and forced to live on the charitable contributions of the rich. A rather stronger component of Berger's persuasive strategy is Logos, or logic. This is a very strong strategy throughout most of the essay. Berger makes very strong logical connections between human vision, interpretation, art, replication, and the effects of all this on the interpretation and meaning of original art.

Indeed, I find myself almost persuaded even towards the end of the essay, where there is an apparent disconnect between the author's original intention and the almost feverish drive to persuade the reader of his views towards the end of the essay. I even find myself agreeing, somewhat, that "the art of the past no longer.