Post #2 Ways of Seeing

- http://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:AACHEN,_Hans_von_-_Bacchus,_Ceres_and_Cupid_-_WGA.jpg

-http://cdn.idolator.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/11/rihanna-side-effects-album-cover-artwork-400x400.jpg

I believe that the relationship between man and woman has staid in stasis and that we have not moved on, which can be easily seen through the two pictures above. The first image is “Bacchus, Ceres and Cupid” by Von Aachein. The image right under it is Rihanna’s new cover photo for he album. The first image depicts a nude woman with her male lover staring suggestively at the viewer. This hits on one of Berger’s essential arguments on human condition. In his argument women are born into the world always surveyed by men. Women therefore become the surveyors and the surveyed, believing these to be two distinct elements of them being women. In “Bacchus, Ceres and Cupid” the woman in the painting distinctly looks at the viewer and away from her lover. The underlying suggestion in this painting is that the viewer is male and therefore she is appealing to him. John Berger goes further by arguing that in paintings men act while woman appear. This relationship is displayed even further in our society with the image of Rihanna. In the image Rihanna is completely naked with words covering her body and incidentally her face as well. The image depicts Rihanna as a sexual object and not the talented artist that she is. You would be hard pressed to find a cover photo of a male singer so suggestively displayed. Burgers view that women watch themselves being watched by men is found in the two images. Both images obviously speak loudest to the men and are intended for their eyes.

Post #1 Ways of Seeing

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mona_Lisa.jpg

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/107942647411517970940/albums/5834562899449634033/5836383626094814738

               There are a number of consequences associated with taking pictures of art. The top picture is of Leonardo de Vinci’s Mona Lisa. The bottom picture is the original Mona Lisa in a museum. By looking at the top picture one can’t tell the scope or the size of the actual painting which in my opinion can take away a lot from the experience of appreciating a particular artwork. John Berger, in his book “Ways of Seeing,” argues that all the reproductions of images more or less distort and therefore the original painting is very much unique. One could also argue that with so many different reproductions of a painting that mystification occurred in which the original no longer is unique in what it says, but in what it is. This is the case with Mona Lisa, which is perhaps one of the most famous painting out there. Even though Mona Lisa is quite a beautiful painting, what has made it to be priceless is the fact that there is only one Mona Lisa that has been painted by Leonardo de Vinci. John Berger goes on to say that the “bogus religiosity” which now surrounds the original works of art has become the substitute for what they lost since the cameras made the paintings accessible to just about anyone. If the originals were no longer unique and exclusive as they used to be then the astonishing price tags on them must make them mysteriously so.