All people have their own way of seeing and interpreting the surrounding things, ideas, and events in their world. Although this is and always will be true, there are general ways and categories in which we can place our perspectives to make sense of how we see it all. Otherwise, art mediums and the distinctive genres that we created for them wouldn’t exist.
A book I read in the past few months (which, fortunately, was one of the more interesting reads in those few months), called “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger, explored some of the different avenues in which people view things. It looked at ideas such as the mystification that paintings of the last several centuries have caused people to feel, the “real” perspectives photography gave people after it was introduced, and the intended meanings and influences early painters and later photographers suggested in their artwork. Much of the book described John’s interpretations on how women are viewed and portrayed in artwork. It explained how the artists of most of the paintings and photos in the chapters depicted women as mere objects to be looked at by the viewer for sexual appeal or for the viewer’s possession and ownership. It explained that this intended perspective not only influenced the way the male viewers of the artwork saw women, but also how both the female subjects and viewers saw themselves. The book later discussed that the main purpose of the oil painting movement, which was largely popular between 1500 and 1900, was to realistically illustrate objects the viewer could feel they could possess and own. This idea of painting things for the sole purpose of making the viewer want to own them was a precursor to today’s commercial art, which the book detailed in the final chapter about publicity as the main reason art is created in the modern world. The publicity present in all commercial art and design, now, combines the concepts of women as objects of sex and possession and of material wealth to sell the objects of desire they portray.
While I read all of this material, I was always inclined to take a different stance on the topics, but I also understood the ideas John was effervescently explaining. I saw some truth in his interpretations of all the various topics. When he mentioned the perspectives of possession, ownership, and sexual attraction of women in artwork, I already knew that those perspectives applied to most men and some women who fell into that unfortunate trap. When he mentioned that oil paintings of the past and commercial art of the present influenced and manipulated viewers of said art into wanting to buy and possess the material things in them, I agreed that many people also fell into that trap. However, like anything in life, I also thought that John’s interpretations of those topics didn’t apply to everybody. I believed that there were (and still are) some men and many women who didn’t see the artwork in the ways he described. There were always debates and heated arguments over the objectification of women in any art medium and the importance of material wealth. I was on the side of the argument that was against these perspectives (and I still am). I was able to see that, because many societies over the last several centuries (and even millenia) have been patriarchal, these perspectives were only purported by arrogant males who intended to influence other males and females to view the world the way they did. As a male who has seen past these perspectives, I have followed the push for more artwork to portray women in more meaningful ways and for there to be more substance in today’s art than the ownership of superfluous material objects. Although there have been small strides here and there for higher quality artwork, the majority of art out in the world today has still fallen into the trap of sexualizing women and supporting material wealth.
From what I’ve learned from the book, I have looked past oil paintings and today’s artwork in slightly different ways. I can see how John has interpreted the meanings and intentions artists have put into their artwork and how they have affected many people’s ways of viewing the world. I know there elements of truth in what he says and can plainly see them in past an present artwork, but I don’t see those truths applying to as many people as he claims.
