![john berger ways of seeing analysis john berger ways of seeing analysis](http://www.bsiarchivalhistory.org/BSI_Archival_History/Thirties_files/droppedImage.jpg)
If you can’t think of any, that’s okay too. But the next question is how can the artist steer the viewer towards their intentions and ideas? This is where titles as well as wall text for exhibition come into play? For your next post, try to think of a photo (or really any piece of artwork) where your response to it changed significantly once you knew the title or the backstory. This is one of the things that makes the experience of putting your work out in front of the public so rich. I think the key thing to remember here is that the artist can’t control what a viewer sees in the work, and viewers will see plenty of things (thought-provoking and otherwise) in the work that will shift their understanding of it. I immediately thought of the HSBC ads (below) that emphasize the way the same thing is seen differently by differently people and, many times, within different cultures altogether.Ģ Responses to “Chapter 1, John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing”” I think this is exactly what makes visual art forms so relatable. That being said, thought the artist may have a very strong message that he/she is trying to convey, it’s up to the discretion of the artist to know that their viewers may not always take their art with the artists’ intention in mind. Viewers of art and photography may not always approach what they’re seeing because of the each one has learnt differently, experienced differently and therefore understands differently.
![john berger ways of seeing analysis john berger ways of seeing analysis](https://advphotojournal.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/hsbcad1.jpg)
Secondly, the idea that viewers can retrieve very different meanings from the same image is always an interesting thought. Berger says that words come later to ‘explain the world’ but it’s the visual that creates it. As we continue to look at it, we may pick up details that change out view but our initial judgement never really leaves. Our judgement of art comes from our first impression when we first see it. In the case of art and photography, you must judge ‘the book’ by its cover because both are purely visual. Firstly, when Berger writes “it’s seeing that establishes our place in the world”, I immediately think of the old saying “don’t judge a book by its cover”. Literally as well as figuratively, the 'mechanical eye' forged a new way of seeing compared to painting, 'The camera showed that the notion of time passing was inseparable from the experience of the visual.
![john berger ways of seeing analysis john berger ways of seeing analysis](https://images.theconversation.com/files/151712/original/image-20170104-18656-3e40un.jpg)
The first chapter (of “ Ways of Seeing”) brings up some interesting ideas on perception of art by viewers that made me think of two things. In Ways of Seeing, John Berger provides a discussion of the changes wrought by the invention of the camera. La Grange’s straightforward summaries show Berger’s idea of the strong correlation between art and photography and how photography became art. La Grange also touches on Chapter 5 about oil paintings. Berger’s chapters that are summarized include Chapter 1, Ways of Seeing, Chapter 3 The Nude, and Chapter 7 Publicity. Chapter 1 of Ashley la Grange’s “ Basic Critical Theory for Photographers” focuses on a short summary on some important discussions in John Berger’s “ Ways of Seeing”.