"Way Of Seeing", written by John Berger, is an analytical article about looking at one aspect of the core difference of looking at man and women (according to Berger, "men act and women appear"; "the surveyor and the surveyed"), in this case, how the perspective of man looking at a woman can not only influence his own thoughts on women, but how he sees her when applied to nudity, specifically European oil paintings during the time of the Renaissance and beyond. Even then, Berger tells a crucial element of these paintings (according to Kenneth Clark): Being naked is descriptive, while being nude is artistic. In other words, if you're naked, you are yourself, but if you're nude, you are seen naked by others, not yourself.
In a strange way, the article is similar to McCloud's "Vocabulary of Comics" in that it tells the primary difference between the way we see objects; with McCloud, simplifying cartoons can allow audiences to see themselves, while with a "mask" on (or with a photo/realistic drawing of a face), you see another. With Berger, the paintings allows those who sees the nudity a chance to see the purity of the women right in front of them; they are still seeing someone else, and she will refuse to look inside of her, but it's the determination of the way the painter sees the subject matter that will make the difference. So, with cartoons, it's possible to observe oneself; with oil paintings, you are seeing an interpretation of another.
For example, in "Birth of Venus" (http://www.windows2universe.org/mythology/images/Birth_of_Venus.gif), the image is centered on the naked women amidst a more island setting. Despite covering herself in a state of modesty, there is still an air of confidence in a desolate setting with viewers on her left and right, attracted to do something about her pure sexuality. In comparison to something more current, like the cover of September's Cosmo (http://www.cosmopolitan.com/celebrity/exclusive/lucy-hale-september-cover-cosmopolitan?click=cos_pop), the model (Lucy Hale) is still the central of her space, but her modesty is already in place, therefore, her sexuality now has to be implied rather than constructed, already in place. The confidence is still there, as seen with the model placing her fingers onto the straps of a pair of jeans, but there are no spectators around her to support that sexuality. As such, both pictures are geared to accomplish the same goal-assert sexuality by striking a pose--but the approach are aimed for different audiences; the sexuality of the magazine model is implied, attracting their audience to something greater, while the sexuality of "Birth of Venus" is explicit, where the women is the main objective.
Taking a look of modern day celebrities, they too can be a part of Berger's point between man and woman. Looking at a picture of Tom Cruise (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20628429,00.html) and Jessica Simpson (http://www.celebuzz.com/photos/jessica-simpson-catches-a-flight-out-of-lax/jessica-simpson-catches-a-flight-out-of-lax-3/), they both look superficially alike; they wear shades, their teeth can be seen among a peculiar simile, and they both wear an element of black, whenever it's a t-shirt or a dress. The difference lies in the way the photographer happens to take them; thanks to one leg assuming the weight of the other, the width of both arms, the slickness of his hair, a rugged beard, and the color of his clothing, there's sheer confidence in the way he walked away from the photographer; a sense of confident stability in a world of movie-making. As for Simpson, with the length of her hair, the position of her one hand, the actual position itself, the consistence in her clothing color choice, there's this power Simpson herself has to go through in order to reach a goal that is not that important in that picture; a sense of feminine power among the world she got herself into, and such, is just another day for her.
Questions for Discussion and Journaling
I am going under the assumption that the painter knew what they were doing, because as long as a love for the arts can inspire artists to create whatever pleases them, and social events can allowed them to bring that love into fruition, then the imagination of the artists back then knows no bounds. Hopefully Berger can see where I'm coming from.
As for an audience, the title of the source of the text mentions "Context For Critical Reading And Writing", and through the text itself, Berger keeps homing in on how men sees women throughout artistic means. By that I mean he writes on how man survives women before a treatment, or how some painting come into being simply because a masculine authority figure wanted to own a piece of the woman he has interest at that time. Therefore, I'm guessing that the audience is those who seek to figure out more about the difference man and women, and how culture itself seems to change over time, but the way they are portrayed does not. In other words, perhaps it is aimed for the average college student, and going beyond them, older artists who seek to learn context on why other artists paint nudity in such a way.
Applying and Exploring Ideas
In regards to seeing spectator and subject inside interactions of text, the concept can work; as the reader observe what the author has written about whatever it is the author wrote about, the reader not only has to figure out on what it is the author is trying to accomplished in his work, but will also remember that the author is aiming for an audience far greater than he can comprehend. As such, as the spectator, he has to figure out the subject in hand and figure out what the author set out to do, why certain passages exist in that specific context, and come up with a conclusion that not only supports his reading of the text, but can make the work itself worthwhile to an overall conservation for others if the mood exists. Because of this, the reader has to be careful when he inserts himself into, say, the main character, because the expectations of the reader might not match the context the main character finds himself in, and for that matter, the purpose of the text itself as from the author.
For humor, it does play a certain role in what the spirit of a person is, to the point where humor can be classified as "sophisticated", "crude", "condensing", "ironic", "silly", and so on and so forth. However, any way you think about humor, it is simply another extension of whomever one meets another, and as such, on an ideal level, humor is simply life that is stretched into something that is believability instead of plausibility.
Meta Moment
Thinking about it, I would say that the overall relationship between all the subjects in this article point to this idea that art is a concept where the viewer's own thoughts on topics such as art is at this argument against the way the art itself is suppose to be treated. To a more authority figure, they expect the model to achieve this goal of arousing interest on the subject, and if it works, the figure would be all together satisfied. If it fails, then the problem lies with the viewer not understanding what it exactly is, and as such, he must either learn the context of the subject, or forever be label ignorant to a mass audience. Therefore, trying to expand one's understanding towards, say, oil painting of nude figures is nothing to be upset about, but if one comes away with the notion that the paintings were created because of pure lust instead of something greater, like the way nudity is seen, then one is learning not from enlightenment, but from ignorance. Because of this, writing can be connected by figuring out what it is people of different opinions can learn from other interpretations, and no matter on how intense the argument becomes, as long as people are seeking to figure out why a piece of an objects exists, rather than what it is, then there shouldn't be any trouble in expanding one's knowledge, providing they all reach the same goals somehow. If not, be prepared to see that knowledge come together for something that can be added to the thinking of the overall product.
All in all, this has been a intriguing article to ponder about, and I can see why an article such as this can be easily applied to writing, which is that it all depends upon the context of the piece itself, and how others tend to see that piece and try to figure out a way to either make it more logical or more appealing to a mass audience. Of course, nudity doesn't have to try hard to reach mass appeal, but if it's personal satisfaction that was supposed to be reached, then I say bring on more articles like it and let me figure out on why the state of being naked is more fascinating than it really should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment